When Louisiana’s 2019 legislative session convenes Monday, April 8th, it’s unlikely we’ll hear the governor or lawmakers say the words “state preemption.” Yet legislators and state officials, and corporate interest groups like the Louisiana Association for Business and Industry (LABI) and the American Legislative Exchance Council (ALEC), will be debating the benefits and drawbacks of preemption. It is the premise that prompted changes to the Industrial Tax Exemption Program (ITEP) and continues to make them controversial. It is also a component of the bill that could alter the homestead exemption, and a major hurdle in efforts to raise the minimum wage.
“Preemption”
is the concept that laws made at one level of government supercede or
overrule laws enacted by another level of government. It’s the
hierarchy of who rules who.
Starting
with the federal level, the “Supremacy Clause” of the U.S.
Constitution (Article VI, Paragraph 2) states: “This Constitution,
and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance
thereof, shall be the supreme law of the land.”
But then there’s the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution – part of the Bill of Rights. It states: “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.”
The
U.S. Constitution specifically designates that the federal
government, through acts of Congress, has the power to coin money,
regulate commerce, raise and maintain military forces, and declare
war. Additionally, with the consent of the U.S. Senate, the U.S.
President has the power to make treaties with foreign governments.
Presumably,
then, the remainder of governmental powers belong to the states, “or
to the people,” according to the Tenth Amendment. But many of our
country’s internal struggles have been manifestations of states
pushing back against federal encroachment (or perceived encroachment)
on those constitutionally undelegated political powers.
“States’ Rights,” right?
A
rallying cry of the secessionists, “states’ rights” continues
to be used as a seeming non-racist explanation for the Civil War. In
1860, the recently formed Republican Party was socially liberal,
advocating for the abolition of slavery. Democrats, the dominant
party of the South, were that era’s “conservatives”, wanting to
preserve and conserve their predominately agrarian economic and
social system, which happened to be financially dependent on
retaining slavery.
“States’ rights” remained the rallying cry of the post-Reconstruction white Southern Democrats, as they instituted laws to segregate former slaves and their descendants, and restrict their rights. For nearly a century, they fought to keep those laws in place. Following World War II, in 1948, the national Democratic Party embraced integration as part of their platform, prompting a breakaway “States’ Rights Democratic Party,” also known as the “Dixiecrats.” In the aftermath of U.S. Supreme Court-ordered school desegregation in the mid-1950s, a more extremist wing formed the “National States’ Rights Party.” Openly affiliated with the Ku Klux Klan, party officials and members were, over the next two decades, indicted, tried, and convicted for church bombings across the deep South.
The
Democratic Party as a whole, however, generally embraced
progressivist ideas and issues from the mid-20th century on. At the
same time, the Republican Party became more focused on conservatism,
advocating for smaller government in reaction to the post-Depression
and WWII expansion of the federal government under Democrat Franklin
Delano Roosevelt. And currently, it’s Republicans that most
frequently toss “states’ rights” claims into national policy
debates, as part of the GOP’s proponency of reducing the size of
government.
Dillon, Cooley, Casey, and Huey
If the hierarchy of governmental powers were completely logical, based on the wording of the Tenth Amendment, it would follow that powers not delegated to each state in its individual constitution would then be reserved to local governmental divisions, and to the people. Yet conflicting theories of local governance, brought to the fore in the tumultuous years immediately following the Civil War, have – over the past century-and-a-half – kept tensions high in the tug-of-war over state-versus-local political control of governmental functions. The two major opposing viewpoints are known as Dillon’s Rule and the Cooley Doctrine.
In 1868, Iowa’s state Supreme Court Chief Justice was John F. Dillon. He issued a pair of rulings stating that since the state grants local governments their existence, local governments can only act in ways the state specifically permits them to do.
Three
years later, in 1871, a Michigan Supreme Court Justice, Thomas
Cooley, ruled very much differently. He stated that “local
government is a matter of absolute right, and the state cannot take
that right away.” Cooley’s ruling morphed into the doctrine of
“Home Rule” – hence “home rule charters” that give cities
and parishes in Louisiana (and cities and counties in other states)
certain autonomy.
Back to Dillon, though. In 1869, President Ulysses S. Grant appointed him to the federal bench, to the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. While there, Dillon wrote the book Municipal Corporations. Published in 1872, it further expounded on his theory that local government cannot act without the express permission of the state. In the 1890s, Dillon served as president of the American Bar Association and taught at Yale Law School.
In 1907, the U.S. Supreme Court officially endorsed “Dillon’s Rule” in the decision handed down in Hunter v. Pittsburgh. Quoting frequently from Dillon’s book, the unanimous decision ruled that “(s)tates have supreme sovereignty over their local governments.”
This
will be important to remember in the upcoming legislative session,
and during the tidal waves of campaign propaganda this fall.
For the past several years, we’ve heard Louisiana Association of Business and Industry President Stephen Waguespack frequently encourage the idea of abandoning “the Huey Long model of government,” which he has defined as “an all-powerful state government that taxes, spends, and plays a prominent role in our lives and businesses.” Last year, in one of his many opinion columns, Waguespack expanded his definition, writing, “The model of government created by Huey Long – which relies on excessive political power and the heavy hand of state government far too much – must be holistically transitioned to a system that embraces the principle of local control and taxation closest to the people.”
Great
rhetoric, but misplaced blame. For while Huey Long embraced and
implemented this form of state government, he did not “create”
it. The state governmental model Waguespack and others ascribe to
Huey Long actually belongs to Dillon’s Rule, which predates
Louisiana’s Huey Long administration by more than 60 years. You
could say Dillon “preempted” Huey.
Now I know you’re wondering, when and where does Casey come in? It’s today’s trivia. John Dillon had a sister and she had children and grandchildren, including a grandson named Charles Dillon Stengel. He was better known by his nickname: “Casey” Stengel.
Coming next: State preemption and the battle to establish a Louisiana minimum wage.
Publisher’s Note: This article originally appeared inCountry Roads on December 21, 2018 and has been republished with permission.
In June of 2008, FBI agent Randolph J. Deaton IV, better known as Randy, was in First Assistant U.S. Attorney Alexander Van Hook’s Shreveport office when he was asked to investigate his first ever art-forgery case. Deaton, who had specialized in bank-fraud and money-laundering cases, asked why Van Hook wanted him to investigate who was making and selling paintings purported to be by folk artist Clementine Hunter.
“Because you’re the only person I know who watches Antiques Roadshow,” Van Hook replied.
“I am a huge fan,” admits Deaton, a Port Allen native and LSU graduate who recently celebrated twenty years with the FBI. “I absolutely love that show. I even watch reruns.”
RANDY DEATON (CENTER) DISCUSSES CLEMENTINE HUNTER FORGERIES AT THE NATIONAL CENTER FOR PRESERVATION TECHNOLOGY AND TRAINING
Deaton learned that, around the 1990s, hundreds of Hunter paintings had been offered on the market. “They looked fresh, like they were painted yesterday,” he says now. But he considered himself a complete novice when it came to art—specifically the work of Hunter (1886–1988), whose work was reportedly being copied by forgers who sold them through an antiques dealer in Natchitoches. “All I knew about Clementine Hunter was that friends of my wife’s family had a painting by her,” says Deaton. “That painting of a bowl of zinnias was considered a really big deal.”
“I ASKED, ‘WHAT DREW YOU TO THIS ART? WHY DO YOU LOVE IT SO MUCH?’ I TRIED TO GET AS MUCH VALUE AS I COULD OUT OF EACH INTERVIEW, TO BE AS KNOWLEDGEABLE AS I COULD. I WANTED TO BE SURE I DID THINGS RIGHT FROM DAY ONE. EACH TIME I WAS OFFERED THE OPPORTUNITY TO VIEW A COLLECTION, I WENT AND HEARD THEIR STORIES.”
Clementine depicted scenes familiar to her—weddings, baptisms, cotton picking, fights at a honky tonk. At first she sold them for a dollar or less, but by the time she died her paintings commanded thousands of dollars when sold by dealers.
Van Hook, whose office is in Shreveport, had learned of the fakes from Tom Whitehead, a Natchitoches resident who had been friends with Hunter, owns hundreds of her paintings, and wrote two books about her. He and several friends had bought several “Hunter” paintings from Robert “Robbie” Lucky, owner of an antiques shop in Natchitoches. “We figured out they were fakes when we noticed they were too perfect,” says Whitehead. “Clementine’s work always had imperfections.”
Before returning their paintings to Lucky for refunds, Whitehead and his friends took the precaution of initialing and dating the backs of the paintings and photographing them. Whitehead later learned that Lucky had blacked out the inked notations and sold the fakes to other unsuspecting victims.
As soon as he got the complaint from Whitehead, Van Hook enlisted Deaton to investigate it. “I asked Randy to take the case because of his thoroughness,” says Van Hook. “I knew he’d do a bang-up job.” The two men drove to Whitehead’s house in Natchitoches to interview him. “We sat at my dining table,” says Whitehead. “I had a big loose-leaf binder with photos of both real and fake paintings.”
Deaton, who was 37 at the time, got right on it. “I bought Shelby Gilley’s book on [Hunter’s] Africa House murals and several other books about her,” he said. “I started reading everything I could find on her.”
“THIS INVESTIGATION LEGITIMIZED FOLK ART AND SHOWED THAT THE U.S. GOVERNMENT WAS WILLING TO PRESERVE IT AND PROTECT IT.”
Another buyer was Baton Rouge businessman Don Fuson, who had purchased $30,000 worth of fake Hunters from William and Beryl Toye of Baton Rouge. The Toyes told Fuson that they had lost everything in Hurricane Katrina and were forced to sell paintings they had collected since the 1960s. But friends of Hunter, including Whitehead, said they had never heard of the Toyes. After consulting experts who declared the paintings fakes, and failing to get the Toyes to return his money, Fuson had gone to several law-enforcement agencies seeking justice but met with no success. “Several people tried going to law enforcement, but nobody knew what to do about this,” says Whitehead. “If it’s folk art that sells for two or three thousand dollars, they don’t care. Nobody wanted to prosecute these ‘piddling’ crimes.”
Deaton did.
“There’s an interstate aspect to the case, with paintings being shipped all over the U.S. and interstate communications via email and fax,” says Deaton. “There were numerous victims. It was a highly complex case. That’s the kind of work the FBI should be doing, specifically the interstate-commerce aspect. Federal law was violated.”
Deaton learned that William Toye had had several brushes with law enforcement. In a 1969 newspaper article, he had reported that his apartment on St. Charles Avenue in New Orleans had been broken into and several works of art created by him had been stolen or vandalized. In 1974, he was caught in a New Orleans Police Department sting selling fake Clementine Hunter paintings from a Canal Street business called Dial-A-Date. In the mid-1990s, he had been involved in a kerfuffle with the owners of the Louisiana Auction Exchange in Baton Rouge, where he consigned for sale dozens of paintings, including a “Degas” and a “Matisse.”
In none of those cases was Toye prosecuted.
Deaton sifted through each case and, in his words, essentially “reinvestigated” each one. A summary of the 1974 case gave the names and addresses of victims and witnesses, many of which Deaton and his team were able to interview. He also contacted the officers who had arrested Toye in 1974 and learned that they had taken twenty-two paintings from victims to Natchitoches, where Hunter lived. After examining the paintings, Hunter said only one, titled “Guess What It Is,” had been made by her hand. “This was proof that Mr. Toye had been copying works by Clementine Hunter at least thirty years earlier,” says Deaton.
He also learned that the police had taken a set of fingerprints from Hunter. “She painted on hardboard that she held in her lap,” says Deaton. “Some of her paintings have smudges and fingerprints on them.
“That set of prints would be nice to have, but they were later lost in a flood or hurricane,” says Deaton.
Deaton spoke to experts on Hunter’s work, including collectors. “I asked, ‘What drew you to this art? Why do you love it so much?’ I tried to get as much value as I could out of each interview, to be as knowledgeable as I could. I wanted to be sure I did things right from Day One. Each time I was offered the opportunity to view a collection, I went and heard their stories.”
But he was careful not to tip his hand.
“I had to be very protective. I didn’t want the Toyes to find out I was doing an investigation. To get a search warrant, I had to be careful whom I approached. I interviewed a very limited number of people to preserve secrecy.”
With his file on the Toyes, Deaton went to a Baton Rouge judge and obtained a warrant to search their house on Keaty Drive. He accompanied a group of about a dozen agents to the house in September 2009.
The agents were taken aback at the condition of the two-story Toye house, which was cluttered and dirty. “We found a house in deplorable condition,” says Deaton. “There were something like eighteen cats in the house, with five-gallon buckets of used cat litter, and the cats in bad shape. One of our female agents was pregnant, and we didn’t let her come inside.”
In the five-hour raid, the agents removed four or five banker’s boxes of evidence, including five “Hunter” paintings, three hundred tubes of paint, and hundreds of documents intended to provide provenance for fake works of art. “We found two letters written on stationery from the 331 Gallery in New Orleans. It was the exact same letter, one signed and one unsigned.” Deaton notes that the Toyes had forged the signature of gallery owner Marc Antony. “This was really good evidence.” (Later, an FBI forensics lab would inform Deaton that letters purportedly written in the late 1960s and early ‘70s had been typed with an IBM Selectric font that was not available until the mid-1970s.)
Every agent had a different assignment at the raid. Deaton’s was to interview Toye, who at first said that his wife Beryl had created the fakes. But soon Toye confessed to having painted them himself.
“I had to go through all the evidence and review it,” says Deaton. “I went through it multiple times with a fine-toothed comb. When you are preparing for a trial, you don’t want any surprises.”
Deaton asked the National Center for Preservation Technology and Training in Natchitoches to allow technicians from two out-of-state companies to use its lab. “We had them test originals from two sources, and we knew the provenance was good. The owners had bought them directly from Clementine. The others were suspected fakes bought by the victims. The scientists used the lab to take photos. They also removed paint samples with a needle. Then they analyzed the paint.” The analysis revealed that the paintings had been made by two different artists.
Deaton struck gold when he discovered that the Toyes had filed for bankruptcy in 1967, 1977, and 1988. Each filing included a list of their assets. Conspicuously missing from that list was a collection of Hunter paintings. “If they had owned the paintings and concealed that information, that in itself would have been a federal crime,” he says.
WILLIAM TOYE
In February 2010, the Toyes and Lucky were indicted for mail fraud, wire fraud, and conspiracy, and summoned to an initial appearance in court. When they returned for a plea hearing, all three pled not guilty.
Deaton, Van Hook, and Assistant U.S. Attorney Cytheria Jernigan prepared to go to trial, spending months developing their case. But as the trial approached, the three defendants, one by one, changed their minds and pled guilty.
William Toye, then 80, and his wife Beryl, 70, were sentenced to two years probation and in-house confinement in a Baton Rouge nursing home. Judge Dee Drell ordered William Toye to sign forty of the fake paintings as part of his sentence.
Lucky, then 64, was sentenced to twenty-five months in prison, which he served. He died in 2017. Toye died in early 2018 and is reportedly buried in a pauper’s graveyard in the Zachary area. Beryl Toye remains in a Baton Rouge nursing home.
Since 2012 Deaton has given lectures on the case worldwide. He spoke to a standing-room-only crowd at the Hilliard Museum in Lafayette last November. He has also addressed audiences in Lebanon and Peru.
He joined the Rapid Deployment Art Crimes Team in 2016. “Being selected was quite the honor,” says Deaton. “They were looking for agents with terrorism experience. There are about twenty-five working agents around the country.”
He has also acquired an extensive library of books on art fraud and set up Google alerts for art forgery and art authentication. “I review websites a couple of times a week.
“The day I retire I want to still be learning how to do my job better.”
His desire to see justice done for the victims, and for the reputation of Hunter, fueled his work. “This investigation legitimized folk art and showed that the U.S. government was willing to preserve it and protect it,” he says.
Deaton is quick to credit others. “All the work I do is for nothing if I can’t get it to a court and have it prosecuted,” he says. “I worked with super smart, highly intelligent, pit-bull prosecutors with the same passion I have for these cases. They were passionate about this case and knew the importance of it.
“And these cases are nothing unless the victims come forward. Don Fuson was very helpful,” he says. “We really want to educate the public how important it is that they report crimes to the FBI.”
Fuson returns the compliment. “We’re really fortunate to have Randy,” he says. “I went to the FBI two times previously, even had an attorney go with me, and got nowhere. The case never would have happened without Randy. He’s passionate about this work and about getting justice for Clementine.”
Toye had no hand in this Hunter homage, presented to Deaton by friends to commemorate his successful investigation.
It’s been a week since free agency kicked off in the NFL, and the first round of moves have settled some questions for the Saints. Let’s look at what they did.
The retentions
Craig Robertson and Chris Banjo – Not major signings, but the Saints bring back two of their core special teamers. Banjo in particular stood out last season and might even see some snaps at safety after the Saints released Kurt Coleman last month.
Wil Lutz – The team made Lutz the NFL’s highest-paid kicker by signing him to a 5-year, $20.25-million deal. Lutz has brought much-needed stability to a kicker position that was a revolving door for the Saints in the decade before Lutz’s arrival. Lutz’s accuracy and strong leg made him one of the best kickers in the NFL last season, and now he’s paid like it. The way the contract is set up, the team can move on after two years with no guaranteed money beyond the signing bonus, but with Lutz’s age and level of performance, I don’t see a reason to expect that.
Teddy Bridgewater – This one was a big relief for me; it’s a surprisingly important keep for a team that seems set at QB. As I said last time, Brees is now 40 and nothing lasts forever. Bridgewater apparently did get an offer from Miami with a chance to start, but he elected to take a shorter contract here, citing, among other things, the importance of being in the right situation rather than taking the first opportunity to start that came to him. Bridgewater is back on a 1-year, $7.25 million contract, with another potential $5 million in incentives (presumably, designed to kick in if he does end up taking over for Brees). The Saints are set at QB for the short term, and could be set for the long term if Brees falters or retires and Bridgewater proves capable of replacing him. Bridgewater signed the deal 13 years to the day after Brees came to New Orleans; the historical significance was not lost on him:
13 years later, I’m trying to see if history will repeat itself in my favor at some point.
Like Brees, Bridgewater was the 32nd pick in the draft; like Brees, he suffered a significant injury that caused his original team to move on from him, and like Brees, it was uncertain whether he would ever play again because of that injury. And like Brees, Bridgewater was either going to go to the Saints or the Dolphins. (Unlike Brees, though, he had the choice, whereas in 2006 Miami was not comfortable with Brees’ shoulder and instead traded for Daunte Culpepper– who, ironically, never regained his old form after his knee injury.) Interestingly, Bridgewater’s potential career path of starting in Minnesota before being out of the game for a couple of years, resurfacing as a backup elsewhere, and eventually developing into a very good starter with a coach who recognizes his unique talents is similar to a path taken by another ex-Viking late bloomer: 2002 NFL MVP Rich Gannon.
The replacements
Latavius Murray – After eight years, Mark Ingram is a Baltimore Raven. The Saints and Ingram hit an impasse in contract negotiations, so the Saints made a move to sign Murray from the Vikings. It’s a four-year, $14 million deal that, practically speaking, is a 2/7 for the guaranteed money (and easy to get out of if it doesn’t work out).
Murray is younger and more athletic than Ingram; although Ingram’s well-rounded game was a good fit with the Saints offense, Murray offers a better likelihood of breaking runs open, and he is good enough in the passing game that it won’t be a liability to the offense or a tip-off to the upcoming play if he’s on the field. (You may remember the results when the Saints tried to spell Alvin Kamara last September while Ingram was suspended.) What is clear, in any case, is that this is now Alvin Kamara’s backfield.
Reports of the deal the Ravens gave Ingram, at $5 million per season, suggests that he and the Saints weren’t far off. (Apparently the Saints offered $4.5 million per year.) But it seemed like Ingram and his agent might have thought they could get more than that, and when they seemed to be at an impasse, the Saints moved on. It’s a bit of a disappointing way for the biggest mainstay of the backfield in the Drew Brees era to finish his career with the team– less than 100 yards short of breaking Deuce McAllister’s franchise record for rushing yards– but nothing lasts forever, and Ingram gave us eight good years. Salute to a Saint once and always as he proceeds to the next phase of his career.
Malcom Brown – The former Patriots first-round pick isn’t much of a pass rusher but is a very good run stopper; the Saints are presumably bringing him in as the starter to replace Tyeler Davison in that role (and also because we don’t know when Sheldon Rankins will be back to form; there’s a good chance he starts the year on the PUP list while Brown and David Onyemata start).
Mario Edwards, Jr. – After the Chiefs moved on from their two best pass rushers so they could run Steve Spagnuolo’s defense (you may remember Spagnuolo as the coordinator of the worst defense in history, right here in New Orleans in 2012), they signed Alex Okafor to a multi-year deal worth $8 million per, a figure the Saints were never going to match, especially as Marcus Davenport was going to see more snaps and probably become the starter. Edwards was a high second-round pick, but he’s a pedestrian athlete (well, to be clear, for the NFL) and hasn’t made much impact as a pass rusher. He’ll probably be a run-stopping backup.
The Saints are still looking for another outside pass rusher to round out the crew; the team has brought in Ezekiel Ansah for a look and has also been in trade talks with Miami to acquire Robert Quinn. Neither one is at their peak anymore after years of injuries, but they would be good additions as the third pass rusher behind Cameron Jordan and Davenport.
Marcus Sherels – The Saints recently signed the Vikings return man to a one-year deal in an effort to get more production on punt returns without having to risk putting Alvin Kamara or Ted Ginn back there. Sherels is getting older but still has a solid record of production, along with five punt return touchdowns in eight seasons as the Vikings’ primary returner. Tommylee Lewis is gone (see below).
The surprise
Max Unger – Unger announced his retirement last week; apparently the Saints had known for some time, but it was a rather unexpected move for the fan base. (Perhaps this is what Sean Payton was alluding to when he suggested the team would need more depth on the interior offensive line.) Unger was only 32 last season and had one more year on his contract; I think most observers expected him to play it out. But Unger was ready to be done; he mentioned in his announcement that he didn’t think he could physically make it through a full season.
Nick Easton – To replace Unger, the Saints signed Nick Easton away from the Vikings. The former undrafted free agent bounced around in 2015 before landing in Minnesota; he started twelve games in 2017 and seemed to be headed on an upward trajectory, but he broke his ankle in the 2018 preseason and missed the whole year. The Saints moved swiftly once news of Unger’s retirement became public, and they inked Easton to a four-year deal (although they had to rework it after the original was voided by the league office due to quibbles with some of the language). If Easton bounces back, he could be another valuable pickup for the Saints’ interior line, a position where they’ve often found underrated gems. (And, of course, Will Clapp or Cameron Tom could take a big step forward and seize the job.)
The rest
The team didn’t tend Tommylee Lewis an offer, and he signed with the Detroit Lions. The teams’ current wide receiver depth chart is Michael Thomas, Ted Ginn, Tre’Quan Smith, Cameron Meredith, Keith Kirkwood, and Austin Carr. It’s unclear if the team will make a move there; there was speculation about adding a quality slot receiver, but Adam Humphries and Cole Beasley, the two most likely targets, quickly signed elsewhere.
Ken Crawley was a restricted free agent New Orleans tendered with an original-round offer. He’ll make a shade over $2 million in 2019. 2018 was a disaster for Crawley, but he showed enough talent in 2017 that hopefully he can bounce back and grow from it.
P.J. Williams remains unsigned; it’s unclear if the team is at all interested in bringing him back.
What’s next?
One big hole on the roster is tight end. Nobody was any particular shakes in 2018. Ben Watson was a talented receiver who turned 38 during the season, and it showed– and I say “was” because he retired. Josh Hill is what he is, a capable and versatile backup. Dan Arnold has potential but is still young and inexperienced. A replacement for Watson is one of the bigger needs for the Saints; the latest word has them expected to sign Jared Cook, most recently of Oakland (where, after a decade-long career of tantalizing athleticism, he had his best season ever and made his first Pro Bowl). If they don’t sign Cook– and maybe even if they do– they could look at the position in the draft. It’s deep enough at tight end that they should be able to get a quality player at 62, and they seem to have eyes on at least one:
Iowa’s dual threats at the position, Noah Fant and T.J. Hockenson, will probably both be gone before the Saints pick, but they could still reasonably draft Smith, Texas A&M’s Jace Sternberger, or even LSU’s Foster Moreau. The Saints were of course at LSU’s pro day, and Moreau seems on the rise after his workouts suggested his talent didn’t go fully utilized in college.
Next time: Updates on offseason transactions and possibly a draft preview (although the Saints won’t be doing much drafting).
During a $250 a plate luncheon on March 19th in Natchitoches, Louisiana, U.S. Rep. Ralph Abraham (R- LA-05) claimed that rising healthcare costs are the result of the economically disadvantaged caring more about “voting for a living instead of working for a living,” according to an audio recording provided exclusively to the Bayou Brief.
Abraham, a medical doctor who ran a rural clinic in Mangham, Louisiana prior to his election to Congress, had been fielding questions during a fundraiser for his gubernatorial campaign when a supporter asserted an elaborate conspiracy theory as if it were fact, telling Abraham that $150 million of the $800 million spent on Medicaid expansion in Louisiana was “waste, fraud, and abuse.” Both of those numbers are wildly inaccurate, and neither were corrected by the congressman, who instead rambled extemporaneously for three minutes about healthcare policy and struggled to get basic facts right.
At one point, Abraham falsely claimed that Medicaid expansion resulted in people being forced to relinquish their employer-provided private insurance plans. “They were mandated to go to the expansion,” Abraham asserted. The program does no such thing.
At another point, he conflated the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA), which was signed into law in 1986 by Ronald Reagan, with the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, the landmark 2010 law often derided by conservatives as Obamacare.
In an effort at diagnosing the problem, the doctor misidentified the symptoms and instead shifted the blame for the escalating costs of healthcare on the working poor in comments that echo similar remarks also made at a closed door fundraiser by presidential candidate Mitt Romney in 2012.
“I’m just tired of people voting for a living instead of working for a living,” Abraham said, “because if they’re on that program of the government- and it could be a state or a federal program- what are they going to do? They’re going to vote to keep that program going.”
RESPONSE BY U.S. REP. RALPH ABRAHAM 03/19/2019
That day, the Associated Press reported the U.S. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid, better known as CMS, had decided to place Louisiana on a review, in response to questionable findings by legislative auditor Daryl Purpera which suggested between $61.6 million to $85.5 million had been spent over 20 months to provide health insurance through Medicaid to individuals and families who exceeded the income thresholds.
Purpera’s analysis, however, is fatally flawed.
For whatever reason, he only looked at a sampling of 100 supposedly random recipients. Currently, there are nearly 500,000 Louisianians who have qualified for coverage under Medicaid expansion. Purpera’s sample, even assuming a 95% level of confidence, would have a margin of error of 10%, and it is impossible to accurately extrapolate anything conclusive about total spending given such a massive deviation.
Moreover, unlike every other state, Louisiana had been allowed to qualify coverage for those whose annual income was proven to be no more than 25% higher than typically allowed, a vestige of an agreement signed under the Jindal administration in order to ensure compliance and avoid massive losses in federal funding. Most states allow applicants to qualify if their income is within 10% of the threshold, and Louisiana has subsequently changed its guidelines and implemented a monitoring system that has won praise by CMS.
No other district in Louisiana has benefitted from Medicaid expansion as much as his. Abraham’s district, LA-05, is the tenth poorest in the nation, and as a direct consequence of Medicaid expansion, it has seen double-digit increases in the percentage of residents with health insurance.
The congressman isn’t not just ready for “prime time;” apparently, he’s not even ready for lunch time.
Renowned as a city of revelry, New Orleans is currently regarded as a tolerant bastion of ‘blue’ in a ‘red sea’ enveloping not only the South, but much of the heartland of 21st century America. Yet the culture in New Orleans has not always been so forgiving. Imagine how different the city (and the rest of the deep South) was more than sixty years ago with strident Jim Crow laws firmly in place forbidding the intermingling of blacks and whites, and punishing those who dared to defy social conventions of the day.
As Steven Knopper described it in Rolling Stone, “In 1957, cops interrupted a biracial jam session at New Orleans’ Preservation Hall and arrested all the musicians. The judge told an assembled courthouse crowd, according to several who were in the audience, ‘We don’t want Yankees coming down to New Orleans mixing cream with our coffee’.”
Local
authorities remained obstinate in the face of federally mandated
desegregation, even as six-year-old Ruby Bridges had to be escorted
by four federal marshals into an all-white school in 1960. New
Orleans and its staunchly defiant ‘old guard’ had to be dragged –
kicking and screaming – into the modern era.
Still, a community of artists, writers, and intellectuals thrived in the French Quarter. A progressive social scene remained as firmly ensconced in cafes and clubs scattered throughout the Quarter as when William Faulkner had described it years prior: “a haven for painters and writers… [to] discuss the world and politics and art and death.”
“When
I was 20, I threw everything in my car and left Wisconsin for good
and drove to the French Quarter.”
Only
one semester short of a university degree in psychology, Jim Sohr
came to New Orleans, seeking to escape the strait-laced God-fearing
culture of the American Midwest. Attracted to the multi-cultural
community atmosphere of New Orleans, he ultimately landed at the
Quorum Club on Esplanade and Chartres, enjoying the company of a
diverse, intellectually vibrant, budding Bohemian community
frequenting that establishment.
In
an otherwise non-descript coffee shop on the outskirts of the French
Quarter, people met to play music and pass the hat, recite poetry, as
well as discuss the emerging socio-political issues of the day,
including Civil Rights and the growing controversy surrounding the
Vietnam war. They were not unlike their counterparts in Greenwich
Village or San Francisco’s North Beach.
But
this was still the deep South, and the Quorum Club was a place where
whites and blacks, men and women, sat together at the same tables,
sipping coffee, engaged in conversation, debating issues of the day
and sharing their life experiences. Therefore, it is no surprise the
local authorities took great interest in the activities there
“They
didn’t like that at all,” Sohr reminisces. “They saw blacks and
whites mixing as something that might grow and take root. When
I came down here in the early 60s, New Orleans truly exemplified the
‘old South’. Black people could not go into the French Quarter,
were not allowed on Bourbon Street, and even had to have their own
cab drivers!”
In
1964,
police conducted what
is now an
infamous raid, arresting 76 people present, including patrons and
employees. The
authorities maintained they expected to find drugs.
“Marijuana was around, sometimes in quantity and commonly used by
some of the Quorum clientele but, curiously, no drugs were found at
that time,” Sohr
says, with a grin.
In
the minds of civic leaders, the raid, an act of blatant harassment,
was justified as whites and blacks were forbidden to mingle with one
another. Even in police custody, black and white men were separated
from one another, as were the women. But “Dutch” Morial, a
respected civil rights leader (and, later, the first black mayor in
New Orleans) successfully defended them, defying the “conformity of
this rigid Southern social structure”, with all charges eventually
dismissed.
Soon
afterwards, Sohr
became a manager at the Quorum, and
as such,
became a
high profile target for police scrutiny. Asked by an undercover agent
to sell a couple of
joints
worth of
marijuana
to a specific Quorum client, he refused, expressing a preference to
give it away for free rather than sell. Finally, the agent convinced
him otherwise, providing him with a small amount, “and that was it;
they got me!” Arrested in 1967, he fled
to San Francisco before trial, immersing himself in the
Haight-Ashbury art and culture.
Sohr
got arrested there as part of a periodic street-sweep of “the
hippies”, and while California had no interest in prosecuting him,
Louisiana wanted him back. He was extradited, tried, and
sent
to
Angola for trafficking in a half
a matchbox – a few grams —
of marijuana.
“On occasion, marijuana offenses were considered more serious than even murder! People did 10 years and six months for murder, but some guys had been sentenced to 50 years for a single joint. I’m not making this stuff up!” He was fortunate though, he says, and confined for “only” seven years.
Angola, circa early 1960s. Courtesy LA State Archives
The
site of a
former
plantation,
named after the African country that had been the homeland of many of
that plantation’s slaves, the
ground on which the Louisiana
State Penitentiary
stands today is larger than Manhattan. Yet
as studies
then and now have shown, in the 1930’s prison conditions at
Angola
were as close “to slavery as any person could come.”
Not much had changed by Sohr’s arrival there in the 1960s. As a Columbia University study described it: ”Angola once more fell on hard times, christened ‘the bloodiest prison in the South’ because of the high rate of inmate assaults,”with one in every ten inmates suffering stab wounds or killed. In 1971, its deserved reputation as “medieval, squalid and horrifying”1 was formally addressed by the American Bar Association.
Rehabilitation was hardly a priority, Sohr recalls, but “there were church groups that came up to visit us, in addition to Alcoholics and Narcotic Anonymous groups formed by the convicts. But most of that was a hype to get out of prison early.”
“Most
of the convicts went to the fields, to cut sugar cane,” Sohr
says, recalling the primitive conditions with an obvious hint of
lingering distaste.
As a former university student, he was qualified for a position in
one of the very few prison sponsored rehabilitation programs existing
at that time. And
so to
avoid hard labor, he gained favor with a modest but well-placed gift
for
the man in charge (he
won’t say now what that was), and
was posted to the education department.
Sohr’s
tone changes, then, from disquiet to quiet joy.
“Walking down a hall one day,” he fondly recalls with wonder in his voice, “I saw the art room.” And that’s where it all started.
“I met other artists there, but the only one I thought who was so much better than me was Harold Swan. I was serious about art, as was Swan, but most of the other inmates were there to escape working in the fields.” His interest and expertise grew, as he learned much from Swan, including the technique of under-painting – the application of two layers of color to achieve a brighter, more vibrant palette.
Sold once and subsequently re-acquired from a collector, the first painting he ever completed in jail may very well be one of his most memorable: a self-portrait depicting a man with a peg leg, handicapped and unable to run or escape the uncomfortable confines of prison. But in the man’s hands are seen three birds, representing the ultimate freedom. With the ability to ascend to the heavens, these birds offered hope of release from the terrestrial travails suffered in jail.
The
artworks he created in prison often depicted that longing for
freedoms denied, as Sohr’s skills evolved
and
he
experimented
with different subject matter.
“Separated by Bars” by Jim Sohr
“Once,
when a church group came up to Angola, they refused to hold services
in a room that had a painting of mine hanging on the walls because it
had women’s breasts. At the time, I told anyone who would listen
that God must like breasts because He made so many!” Sohr
says with a laugh.
“But over time I’ve learned to avoid depicting sex, religion and
race in my paintings. It
only brings trouble.”
Now
in his 80s, Jim Sohr lives comfortably outside of New Orleans,
surrounded by his art and creating more all the time. He
and
his art are still
evolving, and
as
he often says, “It is all I want to do.”
His memories of Angola are tinged with neither regret nor feelings of retribution, yet as he has re-created himself on canvas over the decades, his mind and eye inevitably return to birds as a recurring theme. Unsurprising, as over millennia, mythology and art throughout the world have evoked the imagery of aviary entities as intermediaries with the heavens above.
And Sohr’s strong feelings for what his birds represent endures.
About the author: Thomas Cole is a dealer in antique textile art from Asia as well as an acclaimed photographer, recently introducing a book featuring images of New Orleans, Standing In The Shadows: New Orleans in Focus. (www.tcoletribalrugs.com)
Perhaps it’s the general theatricality of their feud, but there’s something decidedly Shakespearian about the relationship between Attorney General Jeff Landry and Governor John Bel Edwards. Last Tuesday’s elaborate staging of the latest installment of the drama was no exception, with Landry relishing his role as a modern-day Shylock, in a Louisiana version of “The Merchant of Venice.”
Last
Tuesday, Governor John Bel Edwards had
the opening lines, as he began his
official business day at the Claiborne Building, addressing the state
Board of Elementary and Secondary Education, asking them to include
teacher and support worker payraises in their funding proposal for
the upcoming fiscal year.
“Increasing
teacher pay and support worker pay is my number one focus for the
session starting in a month,” the governor told BESE. “Our state
economists who do the analyses for the Revenue Estimating Conference
say there is enough money to do this, and that it is sustainable.”
Edwards
was accompanied to the meeting by First Lady Donna Edwards, who is a
teacher by profession, and he acknowledged her part in his making
teacher payhikes a priority.
“I
like to think we’re all here because of a teacher who inspired us,
so I ask you to think on that, and the success they’ve helped you
achieve. I certainly want to thank the best teacher I know, with whom
I celebrated 30 years of wedded bliss last week.”
“This
is the start of a multi-year process to bring our teachers up to the
Southern Regional average, and I am proposing we begin with a $1000
down payment toward that goal, for our teachers,” he continued.
“For support personnel, bus drivers, those who clean classrooms, I
urge a $500 annual raise. Again, this is just a down payment on what
must be a multi-year process.”
Noting
that it had been a decade since teachers had received any pay
increase, the governor concluded his request by saying, “We have
the opportunity today to show that Louisiana really does appreciate
our teachers and support workers, and that we are committed to
investing in the future of the state.”
BESE
agreed, and is including the payraises, plus a per-pupil increase of
1.375% to the MFP, in the funding proposal they will send to
lawmakers. The legislature can only vote is up or down, as submitted.
They cannot change it.
Mere
minutes after the Governor spoke across the street,
the House Criminal Justice Committee convened in the Capitol
basement.
“Everyone knows why we’re here today, to discuss the death penalty, and I appreciate that the Attorney General asked us to have this committee meeting,” Committee chairman Sherman Mack (R-Livingston) said, to open the hearing. “We’re here today to have education on the issues, and healthy debate.”
Attorney
General Jeff Landry quickly launched into “educating” committee
members on the issue – as he sees it.
“I
am here to tell you that we have a major problem in our criminal
justice system,” Landry announced. “There’s a lot of
misinformation being given out about the death penalty. Those
opposing the death penalty use ‘spacious’ (he meant “specious”)
arguments not grounded in fact. And the never-ending distortions of
anti-death penalty folks take their toll on these families. This
saddens me because the wounds from the trauma of the murdered loved
ones never fully healed.
“As
you know, there’s been a lot of talk these last few years about
reforming our criminal justice system, but all the talk is about
measures that essentially let people out of jail without vetting.
Meanwhile we’ve forgotten to look at the biggest failure concerning
offenders who are the worst of the worst: criminals convicted of some
of the most gruesome murders, who are allowed to live and breathe on
death row year after year. And this is happening on the taxpayers’
dime, while the victim’s families are denied justice.
“It’s
been nine years since our last execution. For those of us who revere
the rule of law and believe in justice, this is unacceptable.”
On
June 18, 2018, Attorney General Jeff Landry sent out the above tweet.
As that was the same day as the start of the third special session –
the 4th
session in a row – for the Louisiana Legislature, many saw the
message as another lame Landry attempt to turn attention his way,
while trying to provoke yet another spat with the Governor.
Governor
John Bel Edwards, otherwise occupied, didn’t respond.
The
Pope did, however.
On
July 2, 2018, Pope Francis declared the death penalty wrong – in
all cases. The Vatican changed its doctrine – the Catechism of the
Roman Catholic Church – and stated the “Church will work with
determination to abolish capital punishment worldwide.”
It
was exactly two weeks after the Attorney General’s bloodthirsty
tweet.
This
past Tuesday, in a soliloquy worthy
of Shakespeare, Landry proceeded to unveil his litany of
disappointment, disapproval, and disagreement with all three branches
of government and the
Catholic Church – everyone, it appears, except the families of
murder victims awaiting enactment of the death sentence.
“No
one advocates for the victims left behind. Lawmakers are silent. The
Governor’s priorities are elsewhere. The families have been forced
to endure multiple trials, yet their
justice has been held in limbo, while the system uses every
opportunity to minimize their loss, in favor of the murderers.
“As
you know, I’m a practicing Catholic, and for more than 2000 years
the Catholic Church’s teachings have supported the death penalty,
but these days some in the Church have made ending the death penalty
a top priority. In doing so, they have chastised many in the faith
who – like me – are standing behind those who mourn, rather than
those who kill.
“Those
bishops cherry-pick. By solely focusing on the mercy of God, they
have glossed over the fact that God is also a just God. They overlook
what St. Thomas of Aquinas understood when he wrote, “Capital
punishment provides the murderer with the incentive to repent.”
“We
must be vigilant in insuring that the punishments imposed are
delivered, because true justice is the punishment being carried out.
The families of victims have a right to see justice delivered.
“Now
I know the Governor will use the availability of drugs as a
convenient excuse. But last year, I sent him a letter, which I cc’d
all of you, outlining the ways that both administratively and
legislatively we could remedy the present situation.
“In
fact there were 25 executions carried out across the country last
year. Thirteen of those were just across our state lines in
neighboring Texas. They are protecting their victims’ families. Are
we?
“It’s
time for Louisiana to administer justice to these families.”
Attorney General Jeff Landry and retired ADA John Sinquefield address LA House Criminal Justice Committee on Tuesday, March 12, 2019
As
his statements show, Attorney General Jeff Landry is no stranger to
cherry-picking himself, to suit his purposes, and the first victim
family member to speak cemented the suspicion that Landry was using
all involved – the families, the experts, AND the panel of
lawmakers – in a political stunt simply to emphasize his personal
antithesis for the Governor.
Wayne Guzzardo’s daughter was murdered in 1995, shot and killed by an armed robber who forced his way into the restaurant she managed.
“By placing a moratorium on the death penalty, John Bel turned his back on my daughter,” Guzzardo said, after describing his daughter’s death, and venting his loathing for her killer. “Other states have found a way to carry out the death penalty, but John Bel won’t do it. He blames unavailability of the drug, but Department of Corrections Secretary James LeBlanc said John Bel told him not to pursue the drug. And both of them ignored the list of solutions General Jeff here sent to them.”
“With all due respect, Mr. Guzzardo, please refer to our governor as ‘Governor Edwards” in this committee,” Committee chairman Mack interrupted.
“He’s not MY governor!” Guzzardo responded. “He claims he’s a Christian Catholic. Come on! We know where he stands. He’s against the death penalty. He uses the phrase ‘pro-life, from womb to tomb.’ Well, my wife carried our precious daughter in her womb, and John Bel is preventing sending the man who sent that beautiful girl to her tomb from being sent to his!
“I just hope and pray this is not because of his re-election coming up,” Guzzardo concluded.
Two
others who had family members murdered, whose killers still sit on
death row, testified about those crimes and the effects of waiting
for an execution date. Additionally, Landry had lined up “expert
witnesses” to speak: Irvin Magri, president of Louisiana Crime
Fighters; John Sinquefield, a former prosecutor who sent (among
others) serial killer Derrick Todd Lee to death row; and Michelle
Ghetti, Southern University professor of criminal procedure, who is
on leave from that position while she serves as Landry’s “Deputy
Solicitor General”.
(This would be an appropriate time to note that the position of “Solicitor General” – or a “Deputy” thereof – does not exist in Louisiana law, or on the state Civil Service roster. It is a title Landry has granted to First Assistant AG Liz Murrill. She is the first to – semi-officially – hold the title, although Kyle Duncan, now serving on the U.S. Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, claimed he held that non-existent position here in Louisiana from 2008-2012.)
Back row, left: Wayne Guzzardo. At desk, L to R: Sinquefield, Magri, Ghetti. Inset: CJ chair Sherman Mack
Ghetti
delivered a lengthy exposition on the drugs authorized, considered,
and used by substitution elsewhere for lethal injection.
“The
death penalty has never been declared unconstitutional,” Ghetti
stated, “although some of the procedures that led to enacting the
death penalty were. More importantly, the U.S. Supreme Court has
never set aside the death penalty based on the method of execution
used, and Louisiana law says simply that the method must be lethal
injection. The law does not include the drug protocols.”
Ghetti
explained that the drug named in
Louisiana’s Department of Corrections regulations regarding
lethal injection protocol – sodium thiopental — was no longer
being manufactured. And one of the
two drugs
that make up the state’s
alternative
formula allowed for administering
lethal injection– pentobarbitol –
has also been discontinued. She listed a number of alternatives –
some used by other states
for lethal injection, and some permitted for use in the five states
that allow physician-assisted suicide. And though she acknowledged
she is not a medical professional, Ghetti suggested that fentanyl, a
powerful synthetic opiod, could be utilized instead.
“We
hear all the time about how fentanyl kills on the street,” she
said. “The Department of Corrections could access it – for free –
from the State Crime Lab.”
(With
all due respect to this professor of criminal procedure, wouldn’t
that affect the evidence and the chain of custody for the criminal
proceedings following the confiscation of that fentanyl? But
we digress…)
What Ghetti did not mention was the part of Louisiana R.S.15:569 that states, “No licensed health care professional shall be compelled to administer a lethal injection.” That is the legal escape hatch permitting pharmacies to deny purchase requests for any of the lethal injection component drugs to the Department of Corrections and/or the staff at Angola.
Several
members of the House Criminal Justice Committee were disturbed by the
tone of the testimony, and – once the scheduled witnesses had
concluded their statements and the proceedings advanced to lawmaker
questions – didn’t hesitate to make their displeasure known.
“I
thought we were here to hear primarily from victim families,” Rep.
Denise Marcelle (D-Baton Rouge) remonstrated, addressing her remarks
to the committee chairman and the Attorney General, in particular. “I
know something about that, about being a victim. My brother was
murdered, and the person who murdered him and shot at my other
brother is serving life.”
“This
hearing is twisted,” she continued. “It seems to be mostly about
trying to blame someone for not getting a drug that is no longer
being manufactured. The Attorney General talked about a ‘convenient
excuse’ made by the Governor. It’s not an ‘excuse” that a
lawsuit was filed in courts in 2011, under the Jindal administration.
The courts issued a stay – under the Jindal administration. The
case is still going through the system. It is the process. It is not
a Republican or Democratic issue. The Governor does not have control
over the process. And you are out of line to be pointing fingers at
the Governor – and at the legislature.”
“Would
somebody please tell me why neither the Governor nor the Secretary of
Corrections are not here today? Why were they not invited?” Rep.
Barbara Norton (D-Shreveport) asked. “Their names have been called
out here. Why haven’t they been invited? Victims have a right to
hear from them, too!”
“They
were not NOT
invited,” Committee chair Sherman Mack replied. “Had they reached
out to me, I would have welcomed them.”
“How
were these other people invited?” Norton asked.
“I
yield to the Attorney General to answer,” Mack said.
“Public
notice,” the AG replied. Then with a smile and a wink, he added,
“I’m sure they follow my Twitter feed.”
“It
seems to me we’re ignoring an important factor in this entire issue
– race,” Rep. Randall Gaines (D-LaPlace)
said.
“We know minorities are disproportionately sentenced to Death Row.”
“Numbers
are funny things,” Professor Ghetti responded. “It depends on
what number you use for the numerator or denominator. On Death Row
generally, it’s dead even: half are white, half are black.”
“That’s
what I said: it’s disproportionate,” Gaines said.
“That’s
nationally,” she clarified.
“Uh-huh.
And what about Louisiana?” Gaines asked.
Attorney
General Jeff Landry took a scolding tone, and wagged his finger
admonishingly at Gaines, “Lady Justice is blind.”
Rep.
Ted James (D-Baton Rouge) had
heard enough. An attorney by
profession who had taken classes with Prof. Ghetti,
James
proceeded to demonstrate his courtroom expertise with examining
witnesses – making Landry
(who had no courtroom experience prior to being elected AG) the
example.
“We
need truth, we have heard a lot that is untrue. Let me ask about some
of your previous statements,” James
began.
“Do you support hanging?
“I
support the death penalty,” the Attorney General answered. “The
method by which it is carried out is on
you.”
“What
about death by firing squad? Gas? Hanging?” James inquired. “What
alternate methods do you support?”
“I
support the rule of law. How it’s done is up to you,” Landry
replied.
“Last
July your office signed off on the motion to extend the stay on
executions for another year,” James asked. “What’s
changed, besides the obvious – that it’s an election year?”
“We
asked for the time to work on solutions,” the AG replied. “We
explained this to the victim families. We said give us a year to get
back on track. We communicate with them. We also communicated with
the Department of Corrections and with the Legislature, suggesting
changes to them and to you. The Governor can administratively fix
this, yet the Governor has remained silent. The big question is, are
you going to remain silent?”
“You
don’t get to ask the questions here, sir, we do. You
want to be the Governor? Run,” James retorted. “In the meantime,
you
are the state’s chief legal officer, as you are so fond of telling
us. What aggressive actions have you taken to address this?”
“We
provided suggestions to the Department of Corrections and to you. We
put before them and you the list of what can be done.,” Landry
said, lame in content, but
indignant in tone.
“We provided suggestions to the Governor. And the only response is
silence.”
“Your
office has been negligent in addressing the problem,” James stated.
“We’ve
taken the path of least resistance and met up with resistance,”
Landry responded.
*****
Governor
John Bel Edwards issued a statement, once the hearing concluded last
Tuesday. It noted that “neither
the Governor’s Office nor the Department of Corrections were
invited to participate,” but
also remarked on the futility of discussing the issue in a
non-session legislative committee hearing, since “A
federal judge has issued a stay of all executions in Louisiana.”
Further,
the Governor stated:
“I took an oath to support the Constitution and laws of the United States and the state of Louisiana. The fact of the matter is that we cannot execute someone in the state of Louisiana today because the only legally prescribed manner set forth in state statute is unavailable to us. In the time since we last had this conversation, nothing has changed – the drugs are not available and legislation has not passed to address concerns of drug companies or offer alternative forms of execution. That’s not through any fault of my own or the Department of Corrections. I’m not inclined to go back to methods that have been discarded because popular sentiment turned against them or maybe some methods that were deemed to be barbaric.”
While we can be fairly certain that the drama between the Governor and the AG will continue — at least for the foreseeable future — let us remain hopeful that one familiar line from the play proves prophetic…
For my people thronging 47th Street in Chicago and Lenox Avenue in New York and Rampart Street in New Orleans, lost disinherited dispossessed and happy people filling the cabarets and taverns and other people’s pockets and needing bread and shoes and milk and land and money and something—something all our own;
For my people walking blindly spreading joy, losing time being lazy, sleeping when hungry, shouting when burdened, drinking when hopeless, tied, and shackled and tangled among ourselves by the unseen creatures who tower over us omnisciently and laugh;
For my people blundering and groping and floundering in the dark of churches and schools and clubs and societies, associations and councils and committees and conventions, distressed and disturbed and deceived and devoured by money-hungry glory-craving leeches, preyed on by facile force of state and fad and novelty, by false prophet and holy believer;
For my people standing staring trying to fashion a better way from confusion, from hypocrisy and misunderstanding, trying to fashion a world that will hold all the people, all the faces, all the adams and eves and their countless generations;
Let a new earth rise. Let another world be born. Let a bloody peace be written in the sky. Let a second generation full of courage issue forth; let a people loving freedom come to growth. Let a beauty full of healing and a strength of final clenching be the pulsing in our spirits and our blood. Let the martial songs be written, let the dirges disappear. Let a race of men now rise and take control.
– an excerpt from “For My People” by Margaret Walker
Nine days after a drunk driver rampaged down New Orleans’ Esplanade Avenue, an iconic, oak-lined boulevard that spans from Bayou St. John to the Mississippi River, and terrified a city that had been reveling in Carnival season, hundreds packed the pews of St. Peter Claver, the largest African American Catholic church in Louisiana, to pay tribute to Sharree Rose Walls.
Walls, 27, was one of the two people struck and killed while biking back from the Krewe of Endymion parade; the other was 32-year-old lawyer David Hynes of Seattle. Seven more were injured.
Although Sharree, a transplant from Illinois by way of Pennsylvania, may have not been well-known to the general public, she was widely considered a rising star among civic and nonprofit circles. In a city far too accustomed to tragedy, the news of her death reverberated through New Orleans in a way not experienced since the passing of Deb “Big Red” Cotton, the award-winning writer and cultural ambassador who died in 2017, four years after she was seriously wounded in a mass shooting on Mother’s Day.
Similarly, the impact was of Sharree’s death was felt immediately and viscerally.
The Krewe of Red Beans (in which she served on the board of directors) quickly changed plans for their annual Lundi Gras parade to include a tribute to her. A GoFundMe page was started to provide financial support to her family and loved ones (as of this writing, it has raised $56,300 from 948 donations over the course of six days). A few days ago, hundreds participated in a mass bike ride to celebrate Sharree’s life and legacy and to call attention to the need to address bicycle safety policies and to better protect parade attendees from drunk drivers.
In her eulogy, New Orleans Mayor Latoya Cantrell noted of Sharree that “every single day she gave everything she could to New Orleans” and that she “gave selflessly to make the city better.”
Mayor Cantrell was among the many speakers who praised Sharree’s parents for sharing their daughter with the city, and for raising her to be such a remarkable woman. “You raised a woman of grace,” she said, thanking her mother and Sharree’s father, Cardies Walls, on behalf of all the citizens of New Orleans.
“She is a daughter of the City of New Orleans,” the mayor said. Like Sharree, Mayor Cantrell was not born in New Orleans, but both women found their homes here.
State Rep. Royce Duplessis read a resolution he intends on filing with the state House of Representatives, honoring Sharree on behalf of the state of Louisiana.
Sharree’s mother, Lois Benjamin, noted in her remarks at Sharree’s funeral that though she came to New Orleans with the intention of never again returning to the city her daughter died, the outpouring of love from the community was so dramatic that ultimately the family decided to lay Sharree to rest here.
“Sharree was not afraid to shake things talents and positive energy were indicative of her limitless potential; we have all been robbed of her future, as her leadership and contributions made all of New Orleans stronger,” EPNO Board Chair Dr. David Robinson-Morris wrote in his statement on Sharree’s death, currently shared on the EPNO website.
“Mighty, in a gentle way.”
The dramatic show of love that moved Ms. Walls’ family to embrace New Orleans and what it meant to Sharree despite the tragedy that occured on Esplanade Street, was no more than she’d earned. Though her time on earth was short, it was packed with impact. A life well-lived, for, as her cousin Krystal Johnson stated at her funeral, “When she did something, she went hard.”
This quality, combined with her astonishing range of interests lead to a list of accomplishments that is nothing short of extraordinary: she was the first person from her high school to attend an Ivy League university (the University of Pennsylvania, where she earned a full scholarship). She studied abroad in Brazil and spoke Portuguese fluently. She was a member of the Alpha Kappa Alpha sorority (whose members, of all ages, lined up to pay tribute to her at her funeral). She graduated Magna Cum Laude. She moved to New Orleans. She founded and ran Solace Space LLC, an “online home decor company.” She worked at the YMCA of Greater New Orleans.
The list of her activities and accomplishments could go on and on. But ultimately, the volume of the work she did — though it is indeed somewhat mind boggling– is not what filled the pews at her funeral. Rather, it was the light and passion and joy she brought to each and every one of her endeavors that inspired so many to celebrate and honor her.
A statement from her family emailed to the Bayou Brief, notes that “Sharree’s friends remember her as ‘mighty in a gentle way’.” A version of this comment also appears on the program handed out at her funeral. Indeed, such a list of achievement is in and of itself, proof of her mightiness. The evidence of her gentleness is in the deluge of loving tributes that recall her smile, her warmth, her tireless cheerleading for her friends.
The fact that she challenged the status quo, and, leading by example, inspired others to do the same.
Giving, Every Single Day.
Professionally, her last career move was into the role of Executive Director of the Emerging Philanthropists of New Orleans (EPNO), an organization committed to, among other things, teaching people to contribute and serve effectively. Her work in this role left “an impact to last a lifetime,” said state Rep. Royce Duplessis. Rep. Duplessis characterized her as a go-giver: a person who is less focused on personal attainment than community impact; who recognizes giving as a “seed we sow.”
Sharree’s decision to take on the challenge of leading EPNO, which before her tenure had been an entirely volunteer-led organization, aligned perfectly with her personal history of civic-minded generosity.
Following her funeral, crowds streamed out of St. Peter Claver Catholic Church on to St. Philip Street for a second line to honor Sharree’s life. Neighbors came out of their homes and construction workers stopped to watch as the horse-drawn carriage carrying her casket rolled by, followed by Mardi Gras Indians and a brass band kicking up noisy, joyful tribute to Sharree, and all she accomplished in the 27 short years of her life.
Well, we’ve all had enough time to get over the bitter taste of the refereeing failure in the NFC Championship Game. (And I’ve had enough time to get myself more situated after a major life change, but you’re probably less concerned with that.) We’re switching to a more irregular posting schedule during the offseason, writing as major events or dates occur on the NFL calendar.
If you haven’t checked out of the Saints and the NFL as a result of that game, then you probably know that Wednesday is the first official day of the league new year, and that Monday teams started negotiating with players (and deals began leaking). Today we’ll look at what to expect from the Saints during the first wave of free agency.
I don’t think the team is going to make any big moves. They’re fairly tight against the salary cap, and moreover, the roster is fairly solid, with no major holes and a lot of strengths. (It better have been, considering four of their seven draft picks were cut and picked up by other teams.) A few positions could be upgraded, but there may not be great options in the market for that.
Instead, I’m going to use this article to look at some players and position groups the Saints might be at risk of losing in free agency. We’ll see what might happen and what a plan for the future might be.
Teddy Bridgewater
The Saints traded for Bridgewater last year as insurance in case anything happened to Brees, and now they face a decision. Bridgewater is a free agent and stands a good chance of getting an offer where he would start immediately. (Although that chance decreased just a little bit with the news that the Jaguars decided to make Nick Foles their starter, handing (well, agreeing to hand on Wednesday) him over $50 million in guarantees on a four-year deal.) If someone does decide to pay Bridgewater to be a starting quarterback, the size of the contract will probably merit a third-round compensatory pick in 2020, a nice recoup for the Saints after trading their 2019 third-rounder for Bridgewater.
In years past, the Saints might have been content to let a player like Bridgewater walk and get the compensatory pick. Things are different now, though, because Drew Brees is 40, his inevitable retirement creeps closer and closer, and the Saints might already have his successor in house. While Brees has continually delivered each season after whispers of a potential decline, each passing year brings him a little bit closer to the inevitable end. This year in particular, Brees’ performance notably declined after Thanksgiving, although it may not have been fatigue, but a hard hit:
This hit occurred during the Thanksgiving game. Finished the game fine. Never showed up on the injury report. May be nothing, but his deep ball was not the same since. pic.twitter.com/EKjcCObuk0
In any case, one day Brees won’t be able to answer the call, and that day might be soon if his arm doesn’t bounce back. If the team could get Bridgewater on an affordable deal with the promise of him being the successor-in-waiting to Brees, it could make sense to both sides. I can’t imagine Bridgewater doing it if he gets an offer to start somewhere else, but at the same time, Jacksonville was the big opening in free agency, and everyone else seems set at least for 2019 (unless the Dolphins cut Ryan Tannehill). The chances of Bridgewater coming back are a little better now than they were before.
Mark Ingram
Ingram just wrapped up his second contract with the Saints, a 4-year, $16 million deal that looked like pretty good value. Ingram is 29 now, but he also has less mileage than most running backs his age, having been in a timeshare in his time in New Orleans. It sounds like the Saints want him back, but they may not be able to meet his asking price. Rumor has it that several teams are interested in Ingram, and if one of them makes a substantial offer, I doubt the Saints will match– they can use Alvin Kamara as the lead back and have a strong record of finding late-round or undrafted running backs. Ingram’s been great and for sentimental reasons I hope he stays– he is a good fit for New Orleans with his all-around game– but it just may not be in the cards.
Cornerbacks: P.J. Williams and Ken Crawley
The team is in a bit of an odd spot with these two. Crawley’s play was such a mess early in the year that he was first benched for Williams against Atlanta, before Williams was so bad that Crawley replaced him at halftime, and then the team traded for Eli Apple to fill that starting spot– but not before slot cornerback Patrick Robinson broke his ankle and went on Injured Reserve; Williams filled him for him there and played reasonably well.
If Robinson’s health was of no concern, it would probably be trivial to let Williams walk if someone wanted to pay him. But coming off a broken ankle, and turning 32 the day before the first Sunday of the NFL season, Robinson is something of a question mark. Williams might end up being too expensive to keep as insurance, though, since Robinson would be playing if he’s healthy enough. Crawley is a restricted free agent, so the Saints have options to keep him if they want to. If he’s cheap enough to bring back, he can be an adequate fill-in if necessary, although I’m sure the team would like a better backup option at outside corner. Crawley’s 2018 was bad enough that he might not even be worth tendering, but his 2017 showed enough promise for him to be a fair investment in a comeback year on the cheap.
More likely, though, the Saints may need to find some new options for cornerback depth behind Robinson, Apple, and Marshon Lattimore.
Defensive line: Tyeler Davison and Alex Okafor
Davison is a solid option at nose tackle, but seeing as how he’s not really a pass rusher, it’s not a terribly valuable position. David Onyemata passed him in snaps this year, and even though Sheldon Rankins’ torn Achilles could mean missed time for him (and at the very least means the Saints need to add some depth there), Davison doesn’t seem like an option they’ll spend significant money on. They could give more of his snaps to second-year player Taylor Stallworth, while possibly adding a veteran and someone in the draft (Davison himself was originally a fifth-round pick).
Okafor was a solid second pass-rushing option last year until he tore his Achilles. The team brought him back on a one-year deal, and he was fine if unspectacular. He would make sense as a re-signing on a cost-effective deal, although I imagine the Saints won’t go broke here, as they’d just as soon give Marcus Davenport a bigger role on the defense.
Wil Lutz
He’s been one of the best kickers in the league– and in my opinion a Pro Bowl snub this year– since the Saints picked him up in 2016. He’s a restricted free agent, but he’s brought the most consistency the Saints have had in the kicking game in a long time, and even though RFA tenders can be a little pricey when it comes to kickers, Lutz is probably worth it to keep around.
Next time: We’ll look at whatever happens with the Saints roster in the first few days of free agency. Down the line, we’ll look at potential draft plans (including a review of how the recent Scouting Combine might affect the Saints’ plans) and the areas of positional need that the Saints will need to focus on (which might clear up a bit after free agency).
It’s been just over 30 years since businessman Eddie Rispone received what he has termed “life-altering advice” from his dear friend and fellow construction mogul, Lane Grigsby.
Grigsby has himself called it “the best advice I ever gave anyone.”
What were these magical words?
“Liquidate all your stock and start your own business.”
The sanitized version of the story, offered as part of Rispone’s biography in his current run for Louisiana governor, says in the spring of 1988, Rispone was becoming increasingly dissatisfied with his quality of life. He’d been working for the same company, Matthews-McCracken-Rutland, also known as MMR Corporation, since 1975, and had risen to become its vice president, acquiring stock in the company when it went public in early 1987. Yet he had reached “a tipping point”, and Grigsby’s advice was the answer.
Rispone, then approaching age 40, sold off some 27,000 shares of MMR stock from April through July of 1988, resigned from MMR, and in early 1989 started ISC Constructors.
Perhaps it was truly as innocuous as a manifestation of mid-life crisis, coupled with sound advice from a trusted friend, resulting ultimately in solid business success.
Yet what is not mentioned now in 2019 are the other things going on with Louisiana’s Erector Set – and Rispone’s world, in particular – in the late 1980s. Grigsby’s advice may have saved Rispone’s ass, helping keep his name and person out of a notorious federal court case developing at the same time.
Big Cajun 2
In November 1988, the U.S. Justice Department indicted MMR, its former chairman Robert McCracken, and its president James “Pepper” Rutland on charges of bid-rigging the 1981 contract for building the second Big Cajun electric power plant in New Roads.
In May 1989, MMR and Rutland were convicted. All appeals were ultimately denied, and Rutland ended up serving six months in federal prison.
Rutland and Rispone – along with Art Favre, Performance Contractors’ CEO and Erector Set activist – were graduates of LSU’s inaugural Construction Technology class in 1972. In 1975, Rutland recruited Rispone to come to work for MMR.
MMR (then and now) does the same type of work Rispone’s ISC Constructors now specializes in – electrical construction and mechanical control planning and installation. By early 1980, MMR had built its business and reputation sufficiently to be included on the “invitation-only” bid list for construction of Big Cajun 2, a coal-fired electric power plant project in New Roads. MMR’s people met with electric company executives and drafted preliminary plans for the project.
But one of the national contracting firms on the bid list – Fischback and Moore, then the nation’s largest electrical contracting firm – was very much interested in getting the job themselves. According to court records, as was customary with several of the biggest national firms, “in March 1980, representatives of several large electrical contractors, including Fischbach and Moore, Inc., had a meeting at which they discussed allocating future electrical projects,” and agreed to submit higher bids so F&M would win the Cajun contract. The only thing standing in their way? That local upstart, MMR.
F&M’s southeast regional director Paul Murphy and that company’s New Orleans branch manager J.R. Sturgill arranged a meeting with MMR’s Robert McCracken and James Rutland. They met at the posh and private City Club in Baton Rouge, on December 19, 1980.
City Club, Baton Rouge
Murphy and Sturgill explained to the MMR executives that the other national firms had already agreed to let F&M be the low bid, and MMR needed to overbid, as well. McCracken and Rutland countered with an offer that MMR partner with F&M on the bid. But that wasn’t how the big boys played this game, and negotiations stalled. Murphy and Rutland took a breather.
Then, according to additional court records, “Murphy and Rutland announced, upon returning from the men’s room, that they had a deal.” In exchange for not bidding at all, MMR would be cut into F&M’s deal on Big Cajun, as a subcontractor. In addition to the money they’d earn for the work, MMR would get a $1.5-million “fee” as part of the “deal”.
Indeed, that’s how the deal to build Big Cajun Two went down – and how Rutland and MMR went down, causing Rispone (presumably) to worry in the late 80s about going down himself.
For just about the time Rispone began fidgeting about his future in the fall of 1987, the U.S. Justice Department issued subpoenas for MMR’s records regarding their dealings with Fischbach & Moore on Big Cajun, and a previous deal done with F&M at the Strategic Petroleum Reserves in Hackberry. At that point, F&M’s bid-rigging habits had become widely known through a series of well-publicized federal indictments and criminal cases across the country.
Strategic Petroleum Reserve facility, Hackberry, LA Courtesy: Teresa Schmidt, KPLC
In June 1983, a federal grand jury in Seattle indicted Fischbach & Moore, the Howard P. Foley Co., and the Lord Electric Co. for conspiring to rig bids on four nuclear power plants in Washington state, and one in Indiana. In early July 1983, the same trio of companies was indicted by a federal grand jury in Pittsburgh, for conspiracy and bid-rigging on projects at eight U.S. Steel Corporation plants.
It is noted in the documents of the Pittsburgh case: “For approximately seven years, from 1974 to 1981, representatives of several electrical contracting companies met at the Duquesne Club in Pittsburgh. The purpose of these meetings was to decide among themselves which firm would receive the contract. That firm’s representative would contact the other contractors and would tell them what bid to submit, ensuring that his firm’s bid would be the lowest. Some of the firms kept track of the allocations to ensure that each contracting company received its fair share of work.”
And in August 1987, the U.S. Justice Department filed suit in Chattanooga, Tennessee, alleging Fischbach & Moore conspired with officials of Nebraska-based Commonwealth Electric Company to rig the 1980 bids on the Moccasin Bend waste treatment plant in Chattanooga. F&M’s Paul Murphy was also named in that case.
With the exception of Securities and Exchange Commission filings showing Eddie Rispone selling 27,000 of the 108,000 shares of MMR stock he owned in 1988, none of the federal documents currently available mention Rispone in connection with either MMR or the criminal cases.
He was, however, a company executive at the time, and undoubtedly supervised the Big Cajun and Strategic Petroleum Reserve projects, even if he was not the one designing and crunching the numbers of the bids and contracts.
James “Pepper” Rutland served his six months, paid his federal fines, and once MMR reorganized under Chapter 11 bankruptcy in 1990, resumed the position of CEO of the company, now known as MMR Constructors. Inc.
James B. “Pepper” Rutland
MMR Constructors headquarters is on Airline Highway in Baton Rouge, next door to Grigsby’s Cajun Industries HQ.
Rutland has not been a heavy political contributor. Neither he nor MMR have given to Rispone’s or Grigsby’s PACs, or to Rispone’s gubernatorial campaign – yet. (Grigsby and Favre have chunked in some change, though.)
Neither Rutland nor MMR have been contributors to LABI’s PACs.
What did Eddie know in the 80s? Did Grigsby’s advice save Rispone’s reputation and his ass?
We may never know.
Yet there’s something from the many court documents in the MMR case that stands out as food for thought now, thirty years later.
“At the sentencing hearing, Judge Mentz stated that he could not view the conspiracy for the Big Cajun bid in isolation, because the testimony adduced at trial showed that Murphy and Rutland had worked together to rig previous bids. He noted that MMR had earned a sizable profit as a result of its agreement with F & M, and that ‘apparently these deals were one of the reasons that MMR became so successful over the years’.”
Now that our calendar has shifted from Mardi Gras excess to Lenten introspection, this becomes the innocuous conversation-starting question of the next few days.
For
those unfamiliar with the question or its premise, it’s a
self-sacrifice, made for religious
(primarily Catholic) purposes, and is comparable to
the secular New Year’s resolution. Every
time during the 40 days between Ash Wednesday and Easter that you
“resist temptation” to indulge in whatever behavior you’ve
chosen to give up, it makes you more “Christ-like.” There’s
also the hope that you’ll “give
up” some harmful or self-indulgent behavior permanently, forming a
new, better-for-you habit
during the forty days.
The
state has apparently decided now is a good time for “We, the
people” of Louisiana to make some more environmental sacrifices on
industries’ behalf.
The Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality is revising the rules of the Risk Evaluation/ Corrective Action Program, also known as RECAP. Initially set up in 1998 to develop standards for the amounts of measurable pollutants in soil and water that should necessitate cleanup, the rules have been revised twice in the intervening 20 years. According to DEQ, the last revision was in October 2003, and this newest update will “assure that appropriate criteria is based on the latest science.”
DEQ held a public hearing on the proposed rules changes last Friday afternoon, in Baton Rouge.
“Nobody in south Louisiana holds a hearing of this significance – nobody in their right mind schedules a damn meeting on the eve of Mardi Gras weekend!” Retired U.S. Army Gen. Russell Honore’ – now leader of the pro-environmental group Green Army — declared none-too-gently. His outrage over the timing of the public hearing prompted applause from the two dozen or so environmental activists in attendance at the one-and-only public hearing for comments on the proposed new statewide regulations.
For while DEQ has been technically complying with the public notice/public hearing requirements for these proposed rule changes, it certainly seems the effort has been minimalistic, at best. For one thing, the only notice of the public hearing was published January 20, in the Louisiana Register, a monthly on-line publication of the state’s Division of Administration. No newspaper notices were published. And the total content of the hundreds of pages of regulatory modifications is only available by downloading a zip file from the DEQ website. Nowhere has the text of the regulations been printed out in full – not even as public or media handouts at the public hearing.
What changes are they hoping few Louisiana citizens will notice or question? They sum it up in two paragraphs early in their document files:
“Often,
regardless of the resources spent, remediating to pristine conditions
has been unachievable and risk is not reduced. The time and effort
expended in making these sometimes futile efforts can be better spent
on projects that provide greater reduction in risk to human health
and the environment. RECAP regulation revision will enable LDEQ
remediation staff to better focus their efforts on sites posing the
greatest risk.”
And
the second key notation is this:
“The
written establishment of the Department’s position on these issues
will reduce transaction costs, not only for the regulated community,
but also the Department.”
Translation?
Under the present rules, we, the state, and the industries we regulate have been spending too much trying to make polluted land and waterways safe for living things. From now on, we’re going to increase the amounts of contaminants we allow before requiring a clean-up. From now on we, your Department of Environmental Quality, and they, the polluting industries, will only have to spend money on the worst of the worst.
Scientists,
environmental attorneys and environmental activists who attended the
public hearing last Friday
didn’t hesitate to
express their outrage.
Gen. Russell Honore’
“Why is DEQ doing this?” Gen. Honore’ asked rhetorically. “You say it in your proposal: ‘for reduction in cost for industry to remediate contaminated sites’. We, the people of Louisiana expect you to be increasing the standards, not reducing them, just as we expect you and industry to increase – not reduce the cleanups you do!”
“Think about this,” Honore’ added, “We already have too many places with warnings in place about eating much of the fish caught there. If we allow more contamination, we jeopardize our commercial and recreational fishing industries, as well as the confidence in our seafood industry. Remember how scared people were of eating our crabs and crawfish, oysters and catfish and sportfish after the BP oil spill? Taking the cheapest route will cost us more than you realize!”
Despite
spending $179-million on confidence-boosting advertising in the
aftermath of the BP spill, demand for Louisiana seafood declined by
half on average – an estimated $200-million annual loss – for the
first three years following the spill.
BP oil spill residuals, February 2019
“Lessening
the standards does not protect the environment. Instead, these
proposed revisions give industry a ‘get out of jail free card’
with regard to cleaning up the pollution they have caused!” said
Scott Nesbit, a biologist who has been working to
restore
the Spanish Lakes
ecosystem. “Under these proposed rule changes, the Shell
Oil-created contamination would be allowed to remain. You’d be
letting them walk away without putting any money into cleaning up the
mess they’ve made, leaving the cleanup of Spanish
Lakes and the Bayou
Manchac watershed
to
the minority community of St. Gabriel.”
Nesbit
is one of the plaintiffs in a so-called “legacy lawsuit”, filed
in December 2010, seeking to force Shell Oil to clean up the remnants
of its oil drilling and waste pit disposal operations that operated
in the area from the 1940s through the 1990s. The suit, which has
alternated between scheduling trial dates and backing off into
settlement negotiations repeatedly over the past 8 years, could end
up dumping responsibility for the cleanup on Louisiana
taxpayers. Included in the alleged environmental damage delineated in
the suit, is contamination of area groundwater – the Southern Hills
Aquifer, which serves the entire capital region – with brine:
saltwater and chemicals.
Spanish Lakes aerial. Courtesy LPB
Among
the remediation methods listed in the several hundred pages of
proposed new RECAP regulations is greater emphasis on “monitored
natural attenuation”. That is defined as “the biodegradation,
dispersion, dilution, sorption, volatilization, and/or chemical and
biochemical transformation/stabilization of constituents to
effectively reduce constituent concentration, toxicity, mobility,
mass, or volume to levels that are protective of human health and the
ecosystem.”
That’s
a whole lot of fancy words to avoid plainly saying “We’re going
to sample it periodically and hope that Mother Nature takes care of
it over time.”
“Industry
has abused Louisiana’s environment to get where they are, and the
RECAP rules were initiated to address the vestiges of industry’s
poor waste-disposal practices,” stated Bill Goodell, an
environmental attorney based in Lafayette, who
previously did environmental law with the Louisiana Attorney
General’s Office, and
is now representing Lafayette residents suing Union Pacific over
residual contamination at the site of that company’s former rail
yard.
1950s map of railyard in Lafayette
“In
1984, when the state created your agency – the Department of
Environmental Quality – the Legislature said the state should not
have to bear all the cost of maintaining a safe
and healthy
environment. Yet
these changes to the regulations would now make all of us responsible
for everyone else’s mess,”
Goodell
continued.
“When
clean-up lawsuits were first filed, industry maintained science was
on their side – that Louisiana clay, used to line disposal pits and
providing a protective layer above the aquifers, was impermeable and
migration of contaminants ‘couldn’t happen.’ Thirty years of
land disposal, neglect, flooding and spillage have proven that wrong.
And now industry is abandoning the ‘can’t happen’ defense in
favor of saying ‘but it’s benign’. By raising the amounts
allowed, you – DEQ – are complicit in their end game. You are
complicit in industry profiting at our expense.”
“You’re
our protector,” Goodell
concluded. “Be true to your citizens, not to profit-taking
industry.”
Goodell
had it right – up until
that final
statement and plea.
What
so many environmental advocates miss, as they attend public hearing
after public hearing and repeatedly argue for regulatory agencies to
minimize the allowable harm, is the true mission of the regulatory
agencies. They are NOT there to protect us. They are NOT
there to prohibit the harm. They are not even there to minimize the
harm.
By
the fact of regulating the amount of harm allowed, their mission and
purpose is to guarantee that harm will be done. Their job is to
permit
industry, and therefore to permit
industry
profits.
They
are there to guarantee your sacrifice on the altar of corporate
profitability.
What
are you giving up for Lent – and beyond?
(The
public comment period on the RECAP revisions remains open until 4:30
p.m., Friday March 8, with submissions accepted by fax at (225)
219-4068, or by emailing deidra.johnson@la.gov)
