Were we lied to? Friday, Jul 13 2012
1 7:00 am
Would he lie to us?
It’s become a rite of summer since Bobby Jindal has been governor.
Before the ink has dried on the new state budget which goes into effect on July 1, Jindal issues a “limited hiring freeze.” As Yogi Berra said, “This is like deja vu all over again.”
The hiring freezes really aren’t really freezes on hiring.
Jindal’s Executive Order merely transfers the authority to hire from an agency head to Jindal. In other words, it is an accumulation of patronage in the governor’s office.
If Jindal was concerned about the number of state employees on the payroll, during the 2012 Session he wouldn’t have killed legislation suggested by State Treasurer John Kennedy and introduced by Representative Dee Richard.
Their legislation merely prohibited of the filling of a certain percentage of existing vacancies in state government. That is exactly what Jindal’s “hiring freeze” is supposed to accomplish.
Budget reductions v. budget reductions
Also, during the 2012 Session, the House Fiscal Hawks eliminated approximately $280 Million in unconstitutional, one-time, revenue from the state’s Operating Budget.
In the Senate Jindal reversed that cut and added more one-time revenue to the budget.
At the time of the reversal, Jindal claimed that the cuts would decimate healthcare for the poor, elderly and young.
Congress just reduced the state’s Medicaid funding for the poor, elderly and young by almost $900 Million. According to Jindal that reduction is “doable.”
According to Jindal a $280 Million reduction across-the-board budget reduction would decimate healthcare, but a $900 Million reduction just to Medicaid is “doable.”
It’s enough to make one think that Jindal lied to us during the session or is lying to us now.