forgotston.com

Below is a list of vote changes that occurred in the House of Representatives on Monday, May 17, 2010. (NOTE: The Senate does not allow vote changes after the presiding officer announces the vote.)

Rep. Downs was actually absent on the vote.  He later voted “nay” for HB 1478.

That is a violation of either one of two different House Rules.  Despite the House Rules not being suspended, there was no objected to his being allowed to vote after-the-fact.  This practice serves to encourage the chronic absenteeism in the House.

There was no objection to any of the vote changes.

CAVEAT: The votes below can be changed again at anytime until the end of the last day of this session.

The rampant vote changing in the House is an anathema to government accountability and is an insult to the citizens of our state.

C.B.

Rep. Downs requested the House consent to record his vote on final passage of House Bill No. 1478 as nay, which consent was unanimously granted.

Rep. Timothy Burns requested the House consent to correct his vote on final passage of House Bill No. 863 from nay to yea, which consent was unanimously granted.

Rep. Stiaes requested the House consent to correct her vote on final passage of House Bill No. 401 from yea to nay, which consent was unanimously granted.

Rep. Norton requested the House consent to correct her vote on final passage of House Bill No. 561 from nay to yea, which consent was unanimously granted.

1 CB 8:00 am

There is legislation going through the lege process to repeal the “sleeper tax” on our driver’s license.

The two bills are SB 407 by Sen. Joe McPherson, D-Woodworth and House Bill 275 by Rep. Billy Chandler, D-Dry Prong.

What’s happened

SB 407 passed the Senate last week and is scheduled to be heard in the House Transportation Committee today.

HB 275 was heard by the same House committee last week.  The committee recommended that the bill be referred to the Appropriations Committee.

However, in an unusual move, chairman of Appropriations, Rep. Jim Fannin, D-Jonesboro, moved that the bill be instead be referred to the House Ways and Means Committee where it will likely die without further action.

HB 275 is not even scheduled to be heard in the Ways and Means Committee. Apparently, “The Scholar” has more votes to kill the bill in Ways and Means Committee than he does in the Appropriations Committee.

What’s going to happen

Because the Jindal Administration is vehemently opposed to the repeal of this tax here is the likely scenario:

SB 407 will reported (at some point) by the House Transportation Committee and the bill will then be referred to the Ways and Means committee where it will die.

Thus the Senate will be on record of supporting the tax repeal. The House will kill both bills without a single vote being cast against them. The “sleeper tax” will remain on our driver’s licenses.

This is just another of the type games that the leges play to deceive the citizens.  They will do what the governor wants instead of what the people want.

Change the game plan

If you want the driver’s license tax repealed and a rebate to those who paid it, you should contact your House member and insist that the House vote FOR SB 407.

Once SB 407 gets through the process we will have to put pressure on the “Roads Scholar” to stop him from vetoing it.

C.B.

1 CB 8:00 am

Rep. Steve Pugh caught!

In a story in Sunday’s Hammond Daily Star, Rep. Steve Pugh, R-Ponchatoula, attempts to justify destroying the emails constituents send to our leges.

What he says

“It’s actually a cost-savings measure to do away with the cost of having to store … that we call spam.” Daily Star, May 16, 2010.

Facts

What Pugh fails to say is that the Fiscal Note prepared by the Legislative Fiscal Office shows no savings to the state. See note here.

What he says

Pugh goes on to attempt to differentiate between “junk” email and “spam” email.  He claims only spam will be immediately destroyed. Ibid.

Facts

What Pugh doesn’t say is that the wording in House Bill No. 1074 refers only to “junk” email.  No where in the legislation is there a even reference to “spam” nor is there any definition of “junk” email. ( See the bill here.)

Either Pugh cannot read, has not read his own legislation or he is intentionally trying to mislead the public.

Motive?

If Pugh was being honest he would not have scheduled the bill twice in the committee only to pull in down in the face of public opposition.

As Pugh’s constituent, it is clear to me what his motive is. He wants only to hear from “select” individuals that tell him what he wants to hear or who contribute money to his campaign coffers.

You be the judge of his motivation and so inform your lege as to how they should vote on HB 1074.

C.B.

1 CB 8:00 am