Thanks Dr. Lombardi! Monday, Oct 25 2010 

lombardi

Smart man

LSU System President Dr. John Lombardi not only rejected a pay reduction for him to reduce the impact of the latest mid-year state budget cuts on LSU, but opposed higher taxes on employees.

In a story in Saturday’s Baton Rouge paper, Lombardi in turning down a reduction in his salary is reported to have said: “Taxing employees is not the answer to cuts….” ( Story here.)

Despite the calls from the media as well as many members of the state senate to increase our state Personal Income Tax, clearly Lombardi opposes the increase.  Doing so would tax employees at LSU.  It would make LSU “second rate” according to Lombardi.

Like Dr. Lombardi, I don’t want my salary decreased or my taxes increased.

Being self-employed a hike in the Personal Income Tax would reduce my “salary” by increasing my taxes.  I don’t want to become “second rate.”

Thanks for the support Dr. Lombardi. Geaux Tigers!

C.B.

LSU B.S.’67, J.D.’71

Vote for the “worthwhile” amendments Thursday, Oct 21 2010 

caution

Recently, a caller to Moon Griffon’s statewide radio talk show asked about the 10 proposed constitutional amendments on the November 2 ballot.  He suggested that Moon invite someone on to explain the “worthwhile” amendments.

That was an interesting request.

“Worthwhile” is a subjective term.  Surely, any amendment to our state constitution proposed by 2/3s of the leges must be “worthwhile.”

I made a list of major problems that I see facing our state. Amendments that fix those problems would be “worthwhile” to me.

Below is my list of problems facing our state, in no particular order, and how they are addressed by the amendments:

–LA has a dismal state economy, but the amendments don’t address the problem.

–LA has an unfriendly to business tax structure where businesses pay a disproportionate share of the revenues to fund government at the state and local level, but the amendments don’t address the problem.

–Our unemployment rate is rising, but the amendments don’t address the problem.

–The Avondale shipyard in Jefferson Parish is shutting down, laying-off over 5,000 employees, but the amendments don’t address the problem.

–The GM plant in Shreveport is closing, but the amendments don’t address the problem.

–The Michoud facility in New Orleans is closing, laying-off 3,000 employees, but the amendments don’t address the problem.

–The quality of our elementary and secondary public schools is poor, but the amendments don’t address the problem.

–The state is about to go over a $2 Billion fiscal “cliff” which will cause a 35% cut to Higher Ed and Healthcare, but the amendments don’t address the problem.

–A prior year budget deficit of $108 Million) means mid-year budget cuts to higher education and healthcare, but the amendments don’t address the problem.

–State revenues for the current fiscal year are declining, but the amendments don’t address the problem.

–There is an increase in those living in poverty and an increase in the number of Medicaid eligible citizens in Louisiana, but the amendments don’t address the problem.

–The state retirement systems have a collective $16 Billion unfunded accrued liability (debt owed by the taxpayers), but the amendments don’t address the problem.

–LA has a vanishing coastline, but the amendments don’t address the problem.

–LA has poor roads and bridges, but the amendments don’t address the problem.

–LA has the least affordable auto insurance, but the amendments don’t address the problem.

–LA has more state employees per capita than other states, but the amendments don’t address the problem.

–LA has an on-going out-migration of our “best and brightest,” because of a lack of high-paying jobs, but the amendments don’t address the problem.

–LA will lose a Congressman next year due to low population growth, but the amendments don’t address the problem.

–LA has too much government for the size of the population, but the amendments don’t address the problem.

Suggestion

My suggestion for those who have asked me how to vote on the amendments is to vote for those amendments which address problems that are important to you.

If you don’t understand an amendment, call your state representative or state senator and ask them to explain it to you.  Obviously, they understand the amendment because they have already voted on it.

C.B.

Analyzing the constitutional amendments Wednesday, Oct 20 2010 

pill-bottles

Proposed constitutional amendments

Mark Twain said: “No man’s life, liberty or property is safe while the Legislature is in session.” Obviously, the great writer was unfamiliar with the LA lege process.

Even when the lege is NOT in session one’s life, liberty and property is not safe from them.

To see what I am talking about, one need look no further than the 10 proposed constitutional amendments on the November 2 ballot.

Since the current Constitution was adopted in 1974, voters have approved 155 of 223 proposed amendments.  That’s an almost 70% approval rate.

It seems that constitutional amendments appearing on the ballot in LA pass unless there is organized opposition.   In other words, the default vote is in favor of passage of the amendments.

It should be the other way around.  If a voter isn’t completely sold on the merits of an amendment it should fail. After all, your life, liberty and property are at stake.

Some intelligent and well-educated voters in Louisiana have asked me to explain the amendments to them. I’m not that smart.  I refer them to the ballot language and other sources of information on the amendments.   They say they read the material, but still can’t understand them.

Shouldn’t the burden of explaining the amendments fall on those who proposed them?

Consider this:

If a LA politician came to your house with 10 bottles of pills and asked you to take them; would you take them?

You ask what the pills are for.  He tells you if he didn’t think they were good for you, he wouldn’t ask you to take them; would you take them?

You ask what’s in the pills.   The politician hands you a paragraph explaining each different pill. If after reading the information you still don’t understand what’s in the pills; would you take them?

The answer to all these questions would obviously be “no” because your life may be at stake.

So, why would you vote for a constitutional amendment handed to you by a politician that you don’t understand?

Remember, your life, liberty and property is at stake when you vote on changes to our constitution.

C.B.

Next Page »