logo
Landry misses obvious link between lax ethics laws and low Louisiana standards

Landry misses obvious link between lax ethics laws and low Louisiana standards

Yahoo27-05-2025

Louisiana Gov. Jeff Landry (John Ballance/The Advocate, Pool)
It's in our nature as Louisiana residents to be easy-going, whether you're a native Cajun like me or someone who's been drawn to relocate here because of our lifestyle. That's why we're always ready for a good time, we prioritize family, friends and fun, and try not to fret about the things we can't control.
But it's also a coping mechanism – and probably not a healthy one. How else can you explain our contentment with constantly being on the lower end for quality-of-life ratings for health care, education and poverty?
This might be what Gov. Jeff Landry was talking about – although in a rather awkward way – in his disappointed reaction to the resounding failure of all four amendments he supported in the March 29 election.
'We realize how hard positive change can be to implement in a state that is conditioned for failure,' Landry said on election night.
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
What the governor doesn't realize is the part he plays in 'conditioning' residents to accept low standards, and why the substantial changes he wants to make to state ethics laws only reinforces the negative perception of Louisiana, both from within and outside the state.
Keep in mind that ethics laws in Louisiana are weak as they currently exist, with minimal consequences for offenders. While some provisions can and should be updated to keep up with the times, the governor has instead set on a path to undermine what little credibility the system has.
Landry's ethics law retooling has rightfully caught the attention of the Public Affairs Research Council of Louisiana, the state's pre-eminent good government organization. The nonpartisan group's leadership made clear where they stand on the legislative package in a recent commentary.
'That's the wrong message to send in a state riddled with Louisiana's long and sordid political history, particularly when polls show public trust in government is at historic lows,' PAR President Steven Procopio and Research Director Melinda Deslatte wrote.
The updates Landry supports include House Bill 674, a complex proposal with dozens of changes in how ethics investigations are conducted. They would give elected officials and government employees questionable leverage to discourage state ethics investigations.
Authored by Rep. Beau Beaullieu, R-New Iberia, the measure would require the ethics administration to turn over witness statements and other documents obtained early in the investigative process to the subject, even if the ethics board decides not to pursue charges.
Beaullieu has said lawmakers from both parties have complained about the ethics board, arguing it needs to be more transparent. That was evident last year when one of his Democratic colleagues in the Louisiana House, Rep. Steven Jackson of Shreveport, gained decisive approval for two ethics law changes. One reduced how often elected officials have to file their personal financial disclosure forms with the state, and the second dramatically cut the fines lobbyists have to pay if they file paperwork late.
Jackson's actions followed years of angry exchanges between himself and ethics administration staff over more than $10,000 in fines he was assessed for failure to file campaign finance and personal disclosure reports.
Do you see a pattern here? Instead of public officials choosing to change the behavior that put them in the crosshairs of ethics investigators, they've pushed to change the laws meant to discourage such conduct.
The trend is poised to continue this year. State Ethics Administrator David Bordelon described the new investigative process under Beaullieu's measure as 'skewed' in favor of a public servant accused of wrongdoing. 'It presents some sort of questionable standards,' he told ethics board members at a meeting last month.
The origin story of Beaullieu's legislation speeds past 'questionable' and steers directly toward dubious.
It was written with the help of Stephen Gelé, an attorney who has represented the governor in front of the ethics board. When he was attorney general, Landry failed to disclose he took free flights on a donor's private plane for a conference in Hawaii in 2021. Though House Bill 674 wouldn't affect the outcome of charges that have been pending against Landry for two years and counting, it would hinder comparable investigations in the future.
More proposed ethics law changes, all with Landry's blessing, would further discourage accountability for elected officials and government workers.
House Bill 160 from Rep. Kellee Dickerson, R-Denham Springs, would end the public's ability to confidentially or anonymously report illegal activity. The ethics board has warned lawmakers it would have a 'chilling effect' on people coming forward to report wrongdoing by public employees and leaders.
Another Beaullieu proposal, House Bill 674, would end a prohibition in state law on government employees and elected officials from receiving gifts under most circumstances. Between 'seasonal or holiday food' and regular gifts, the largesse could reach up to $400 in value annually.
When you think of the potential to grease the skids of bureaucracy with a $100 gift card here or $100 worth of festive fare there, you should get an idea of why Beaullieu's bill might be cause for concern. If not, you don't have to look very far back to find out why – at both the state and local level.
There's been minimal resistance to Landry's offensive against state ethics law, which started last year when he got lawmakers to approve giving him more direct control of the ethics board's makeup. And while this year's legislation appears to pack a significant punch, it might just be the first in a years-long assault on the minimal virtues left in Louisiana government.
Don't say you weren't warned.
SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

"Who cares": Congress' Dems say good riddance to Karine Jean-Pierre
"Who cares": Congress' Dems say good riddance to Karine Jean-Pierre

Axios

time32 minutes ago

  • Axios

"Who cares": Congress' Dems say good riddance to Karine Jean-Pierre

If former White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre thought she would set off a five-alarm fire among top Democrats by leaving the party, she is about to be sorely disappointed. Why it matters: Democratic lawmakers who spoke to Axios characterized her personal motives as too transparent to be a knock on the party — and they don't exactly feel like they're losing their best messenger either. "Who cares," exclaimed one House Democrat. "It's easy for paid operatives to leave the party ... until they need something." Said another: "Her explanation for this move is as confusing and disjointed as her answers in her White House press briefings." Jean-Pierre did not respond to a request for comment. Driving the news: Jean-Pierre revealed Wednesday that she is becoming an independent after serving in two Democratic presidential administrations. The announcement coincides with the release of a new book, "Independent: A Look Inside a Broken White House, Outside the Party Lines." The book's description decries "blind loyalty to a two-party democratic system" and promises to delve into "the three weeks that led to Biden's abandoning his bid for a second term and the betrayal by the Democratic Party that led to his decision." What they're saying: "Other than Sean Spicer ... she was the worst press secretary in American history," a third House Democrat told Axios of Jean-Pierre. "There were rumors that the Biden folks were trying to get rid of her because she's so terrible," the lawmaker said, speculating that she is trying to curry favor with Republicans to avoid a congressional subpoena. "I don't know who wrote her book. We know she couldn't give a press conference without reading every word from her briefing," they added. Zoom in: Jean-Pierre has also been lit up by her former Biden White House colleagues, with one former official telling Axios' Alex Thompson she was "one of the most ineffectual and unprepared people I've ever worked with." "She had meltdowns after any interview that asked about a topic not sent over by producers," the official said. Said another: "The amount of time that was spent coddling [Jean-Pierre] and appeasing her was astronomical compared to our attention on actual matters of substance." Zoom out: The latest Bidenworld infighting comes after the release of a new book from Thompson and CNN's Jake Tapper, " Original Sin," which recounts how Biden's team shielded him from public scrutiny about his age.

Democrats more likely than Republicans to boycott brands, new survey
Democrats more likely than Republicans to boycott brands, new survey

Axios

time32 minutes ago

  • Axios

Democrats more likely than Republicans to boycott brands, new survey

Why it matters: These murky expectations highlight the complicated environment businesses are currently operating in. What they're saying: "Businesses need to understand how their brand aligns to current issues and the values that matter to their customer base," says Mallory Newall, vice president at Ipsos. "Brands cannot please everyone, and wading into the political fray does not come without risk. It needs to be done in a strategic way. However, there are potential upsides if companies have a clear understanding of who they're talking to and who their customers are. Those who act inauthentically will lose ground in this environment," she added. State of play: There's a disconnect in what consumers say and what they do. 53% of Americans say they are less likely to buy from a company that takes a stance they don't agree with, but only 30% actually do. Between the lines: A company's political or social stances influence Democrats more than Republicans, per the survey. Democrats are more likely to boycott (40%) than Republicans (24%), but they are also 2x more likely to go out of their way to support a brand that aligns with their values. Target is the latest American corporation to grapple with these boycotts, following its retreat from diversity, equity and inclusion efforts. Of note: Boycotting is a luxury afforded to those with disposable income, per the survey. Households with incomes of $100k and above are 50% more likely to stop buying from a company they disagree with than those households making $50k and below. What to watch: 67% of Democrats say they are closely tracking how companies respond to pending Supreme Court decisions, compared to 52% of Republicans. There is more appetite across party lines for business commentary on economic issues — like inflation and trade policies — than other policy issues. The bottom line: "The data suggest that Democratic consumers are much more likely to actually follow through on the threat to withhold or reduce spending when they disagree with brands during this era of complete GOP control," says Matt House, managing partner at CLYDE.

Exclusive: Dems press Trump admin. for response to China-backed cyberattacks
Exclusive: Dems press Trump admin. for response to China-backed cyberattacks

Axios

time32 minutes ago

  • Axios

Exclusive: Dems press Trump admin. for response to China-backed cyberattacks

A group of Democratic lawmakers are pressing the Trump administration to clarify who is leading the government's efforts to eradicate China-backed hackers from U.S. critical infrastructure and telecom networks. Why it matters: Roughly 1,000 people have already left the nation's top cyber agency this year through voluntary buyouts and other workforce cuts. Those cuts could create dangerous weaknesses in the nation's cyber defenses, the lawmakers argue in a letter exclusively shared with Axios. Zoom in: Rep. Ritchie Torres (D-N.Y.) sent a letter today to Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem and Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard demanding more clarity on who is leading the response against two major China-backed cyberattacks uncovered during the Biden administration. Democratic Reps. Raja Krishnamoorthi, Kathy Castor, Ro Khanna, Haley Stevens, Shontel Brown and Jill Tokuda joined Torres as signatories. The lawmakers are also requesting Noem and Gabbard provide an update on any ongoing investigations into both the Volt Typhoon attacks on U.S. critical infrastructure and the Salt Typhoon campaign to surveil high-profile individuals' cell phones. The group is also asking for an update on how proposed budget cuts and the recent workforce reductions at CISA will impact those investigations. What they're saying: "This is not a partisan issue. It is a matter of grave consequence for the security of America both at home and abroad," the lawmakers write. "We owe it to the American people to protect them from the specter of a cyber 9/11 at the hands of our most formidable foreign adversary." Threat level: For years, top American officials have been warning about increasing cyber threats from China. China-backed Volt Typhoon has been prepositioning in critical infrastructure — such as water utilities, power plants and railways — for at least five years, according to congressional testimony. Salt Typhoon, another Chinese government-backed group, was caught hacking into several high-profile politicians' phones last year, including President Trump's. "Somewhere, Xi Jinping is smiling at America's insistence on degrading its own cyber capabilities," the lawmakers write.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store