As charges linger over Landry, Louisiana House votes to overhaul ethics investigations
The Louisiana House voted 96-0 for a rewrite of the state ethics laws on Monday, May 5, 2025. (Julie O'Donoghue/Louisiana Illuminator)
Investigations into public officials for alleged misconduct could be significantly blunted under a proposal moving forward in the Louisiana Legislature. The bill targets the same process used to bring ethics charges against Gov. Jeff Landry two years ago.
The House of Representatives voted 96-0 Monday for House Bill 674, sponsored by Rep. Beau Beaullieu, R-New Iberia. It would give elected officials and government employees more tools to push back on a state ethics investigation. The legislation will now be heard in the Senate.
Members of the Louisiana Board of Ethics said the measure would make it harder for the state to pursue charges over ethical misconduct.
At 30 pages, the bill is complex and makes dozens of changes to procedures and policies. Yet not one state representative asked a question about it on the House floor Monday before members voted to approve it.
Beaullieu said lawmakers from both parties are frustrated with the ethics board, which has been accused of harassing public officials and lacking transparency.
The legislation was drafted with the help of Stephen Gelé, an attorney representing Landry in his negotiations with the ethics board over his charges from 2023. Landry did not disclose flights he took on a political donor's private plane to Hawaii while attorney general in 2021, although state law required him to do so.
Gelé said Beaullieu's bill wouldn't impact the outcome of Landry's pending charges because it would only apply to complaints and investigations that occur after the legislation passes.
Advocates for government transparency have expressed concerns, however. Last week, Ethics Administrator David Bordelon also described the proposed new investigative process as 'skewed' in favor of a public servant accused of wrongdoing.
'It presents some sort of questionable standards,' Bordelon told state ethics board members at their meeting Friday during a lengthy discussion on the legislation.
The ethics board oversees the enforcement of campaign finance laws and the state ethics code for public employees, elected officials and lobbyists. Anyone from a public school teacher to the governor can be subject of one of its investigations.
Bordelon said witnesses and people interviewed by the ethics staff during an investigation might be less forthcoming if changes in the bill are adopted. Under the legislation, the board would be required to turn over witness statements and documents it secures early in the investigative process, even if the board chooses not to pursue charges.
'It is very much going to change how we obtain the documents and how we present the documents,' Bordelon said.
SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
The ethics board will also have less time to decide whether to issue charges over an ethics violation under Beaullieu's legislation. Currently, the board has a year from when it receives a sworn complaint about an alleged ethical violation to bring charges or once the board votes to investigate a potential violation.
House Bill 674 would add several more steps to that process by allowing the subject of the complaint to object and respond to accusations more often during the board's deliberations.
'They are lopping off a couple of months, minimum,' ethics board member Alfred 'Butch' Speer said. Former Gov. John Bel Edwards appointed Speer to the board after he had served as clerk of the Louisiana House for 35 years.
Bordelon agreed. 'From the staff level, we will need to have investigations done quicker,' he said.
Speer is worried the legislation would let subjects facing ethics charges 'run out' the clock on investigations by stalling on depositions and other time-consuming procedures allowed under the bill. He suggested the legislature look at giving the ethics board two years to issue charges instead of adding more steps to the process.
'If they drag their feet long enough, then we run out of time,' Speer said.
Retired Judge Vanessa Whipple, an ethics board appointee of Gov. Landry, said she's worried the bill would allow any district court in the state to intervene in an ethics investigation so long as a witness in the case lived in its jurisdiction. Currently, ethics cases that reach a state judge on appeal are handled in the 19th Judicial District Court in Baton Rouge, where the ethics board is located.
Whipple said this provision could result in district and appellate courts issuing conflicting decisions on ethics matters.
The proposed changes would also require the ethics board to expand its staff, especially if they are expected to present in district courts across the state, Whipple added. The board would likely need at least one more attorney and possibly more support workers, she said.
Bordelon said a financial analysis of the bill he provided to the legislature indicates the changes would cost $100,000 annually.
Before the House vote, Beaullieu made one adjustment to his bill in response to complaints from government transparency advocates. He removed a provision that would have required a district court judge to halt subpoenas for an investigation if they annoyed, embarrassed or oppressed a witness.
Last year, Landry and lawmakers made changes to the ethics board that give the governor more control over its members. Landry now gets to select his board appointees directly. Previously, he could only pick them from lists the leaders of Louisiana's private colleges and universities provided — a provision meant to insulate the board from political pressure.
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
Hobbs vetoes antisemitism bill, says it's an attack on teachers
Image via Getty Images Arizona's Democratic governor has vetoed a GOP-backed bill that would ban the teaching of antisemitism in public schools and universities — and allow teachers to be personally sued for alleged violations. Critics claimed the proposal would put public school teachers, and comprehensive teaching about the Holocaust, at risk. House Bill 2867 sought to ban Arizona's public K-12 teachers and university professors from teaching antisemitism in their classrooms, and make it illegal for schools to provide antisemitic professional development. But combating antisemitism was just a smokescreen, Gov. Katie Hobbs wrote in her veto letter. 'Unfortunately, this bill is not about antisemitism; it's about attacking our teachers,' Hobbs wrote. 'It puts an unacceptable level of personal liability in place for our public school, community college, and university educators and staff, opening them up to threats of personally costly lawsuits.' SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX Sponsored by Rep. Michael Way, R-Queen Creek, the bill would have allowed students or their parents to bring civil lawsuits against teachers who they claim violated the law. It would have required teachers to be held personally liable for damages, exempting antisemitism from laws that generally shield teachers from being sued for what they teach in the classroom. A handful of Democratic legislators also voted to pass HB2867, including sisters Alma and Consuelo Hernandez, who are both Jewish and have a history of support for Israel and advocacy for expanding laws to combat antisemitism. The bill's creation was spurred by increased antisemitism that occurred across the country and in Arizona after Hamas's brutal Oct. 7, 2023 attack on Israel that left more than 1,200 dead and 240 kidnapped, and Israel's violent and ongoing response to it. 'If you're pretending that this (antisemitism in schools) does not happen, shame on you, because it does and it's problematic,' Alma Hernandez said before the final vote in the House of Representatives on June 4. '…it is not your right to tell us what is offensive and what isn't antisemitism.' Lori Shepherd, the executive director of the Tucson Jewish Museum and Holocaust Center, asked Hobbs to veto the bill to ensure that teachers can continue with comprehensive lessons about the Holocaust and its aftermath. 'Teaching the Holocaust is not simple,' Shepherd wrote in a June 6 letter to Hobbs. 'It requires confronting moral ambiguity, exploring the roots of hatred, and examining how propaganda, nationalism, and apathy paved the way to genocide. It also invites students to ask tough questions about the legacy of the Holocaust today—questions that often touch on the history of Zionism, the founding of the State of Israel, and the persistence of global antisemitism.' During a Feb. 18 House Education Committee hearing, Republican Rep. Matt Gress, of Phoenix, said he didn't interpret HB2867 as possibly interfering with education about the Holocaust. 'Hate should not be existing inside of our schools,' Gress said. 'And I think this bill moves in that direction.' The definition of antisemitism used in the bill is a controversial one created by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance that includes 'claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavour' as an example of antisemitism. Even Ken Stern, who helped to draft the definition 20 years ago when he was the American Jewish Committee's antisemitism expert, now advocates against its use in legal matters, arguing that it has been used as 'a blunt instrument to label anyone an antisemite.' When Sen. Mitzi Epstein of Tempe, whose husband is Jewish, proposed an amendment to the bill to ban the teaching of various other types of discrimination, remove personal civil liability for teachers and apply the law to both public and private schools, it was voted down along party lines. Hobbs wrote in her veto letter that parents and students can already report allegations of unprofessional conduct from teachers to the State Board of Education. 'I am confident that by using those tools, we can fulfill our moral and legal responsibility to eradicate hate and discrimination in our public school system,' she wrote. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
Lawmakers reject insurance bills that had direct relief for Louisiana homeowners
Gov. Jeff Landry speaks to reporters about his legislative agenda to bring down high auto insurance rates on April 9, 2025. (Photo credit: Wes Muller/Louisiana Illuminator) With just two days left to write new laws in the 2025 legislative session, Louisiana lawmakers have halted the only two insurance proposals this year that critics said would have directly provided relief to homeowners struggling to afford skyrocketing rates. Senate Bill 235 and House Bill 356 drew wide public interest as homeowners wait for state officials to rein in the coverage costs. Average homeowner insurance premiums in Louisiana are the eighth highest in the nation, according to the industry news site Both were also among the few insurance bills that had bipartisan support, though not quite enough from conservatives. Sponsored by Sen. Royce Duplessis, D-New Orleans, Senate Bill 235 would have created an annual tax credit of up to $2,000 for homeowner's insurance payments. It would have been available to anyone with homeowner's coverage and an income no greater than 200% of the federal poverty level. The legislation included a provision to sunset the credit after 10 years. After narrowly clearing the Senate, Duplessis' SB-235 narrowly failed in the House as Republicans there tanked it with a two-vote margin, 49-52. The other measure, House Bill 356 by Rep. Jacob Braud, R-Belle Chasse, would have required insurance companies to let homeowners who are free of mortgages to purchase 'stated value' policies. It would cover the home for a lesser amount chosen by the homeowner rather than for its full market value. Although the bill is still alive, it's a mere shell of the version that cleared the House in a 79-20 vote just last week when it drew strong vocal support from Republicans like Rep. Tim Kerner of Lafitte, who called it the only bill he has seen this year that actually helps homeowners with affordability. The original measure would have required insurers to create stated value policies upon the request of a customer, but Senate lawmakers changed a single word in the bill — from 'shall' to 'may' — doing away with the mandate provision that served as the cornerstone on which the rest of the bill relied. Rep. Mike Bayham, R-Chalmette, expressed his disappointment over the fate of the two bills in an interview Tuesday, saying the high cost of insurance is the one issue above all others that lawmakers really needed to fix. 'Everything else seems to be, 'Let's pass something and just hope the rates get better,' Bayham said. 'I thought Braud's bill was more direct, and I thought Duplessis' bill would have provided direct relief even on a limited scale. At the end of the day, we were elected to the Legislature to tackle the insurance crisis.' The version of Duplessis' bill that reached the House floor would have capped the state's total annual payouts for the homeowner's insurance tax credit at $10 million. It also would have made the credit refundable for filers earning less than $25,000 per year, meaning they could have received a cash rebate for the credit. However, Rep. Julie Emerson, R-Carencro, gathered enough votes for an amendment to remove the refundable provision and to lower the state's payout cap to $1 million per year. Rep. Neil Riser, R-Columbia, who presented the bill on the House floor for Duplessis, objected to those changes but lost that vote in a 65-29 decision. 'This bill is to try to help those who need the most as far as homeowner insurance is concerned,' Riser said. Emerson said the bill would only shift the cost of high homeowner's insurance to the broader Louisiana tax base while doing nothing to address the underlying causes of high rates. 'I don't think that that gives a lot of incentive for rates to go down when we're basically subsidizing those rates,' she said. House Insurance Committee Chairman Gabe Firment, R-Pollock, who has spearheaded much of the pro-insurance industry legislation this year, rallied his conservative colleagues to oppose Duplessis' bill by calling out one of the organizations backing it, the Greater New Orleans Housing Alliance. Firment took issue with recent text messages from the Alliance that accused lawmakers of doing nothing to pass meaningful insurance reform. He pointed out the group gave a poor rating to Republican Congressman Steve Scalise ahead of his 2024 reelection and a positive rating to the Democratic challenger Mel Manuel, whom Firment called a 'radical transgender candidate.' Questioning the relevance of those comments, House Speaker Phillip DeVillier, R-Eunice, began interjecting to ask Firment to focus his comments on the bill, but the Grant Parish lawmaker had made his point and yielded the floor. Louisiana homeowners might get option to insure their properties for 'stated value' Meanwhile Monday in the Senate, members of the upper chamber were approving a neutered version of Braud's legislation with little discussion. If signed into law, the Senate's version of the legislation would make no changes to what is already allowed under current law. Stated value policies are typically customized for homeowners who have paid off all or most of their mortgage and prefer to shoulder the risk of having only partial coverage. They would receive lower premiums in exchange for paying out-of-pocket for any damages, increasing the likelihood of losing their homes entirely in the event of a bad storm or a lawsuit. In an interview Tuesday, Braud said there's no law that would currently stop insurers from selling stated-value policies, but he wouldn't go so far as to say the Senate changes rendered his proposal a 'do-nothing' bill. 'We've gotta start somewhere,' the Plaquemines Parish lawmaker said. Braud added that he believes passing the neutered version of the bill might not change anything this year, but it could help the idea of stated value polices gain momentum. Braud said he hopes he can get the word 'shall' back into the law during next year's session. Pro-industry lawmakers such as Firment opposed Braud's legislation, arguing it would shift insurance costs to other parts of the state that aren't prone to hurricanes and would lead to an increase in blighted property from people abandoning their damaged homes after storms. Ironically, the same group Firment criticized during debate on Duplessis' bill is aligned with him in opposition to Braud's bill. In a phone interview Tuesday, Andreanecia Morris, president of the Greater New Orleans Housing Alliance, said her organization is sympathetic to the plight of homeowners everywhere who can't afford insurance, but she believes Braud's bill doesn't address the underlying problem of high rates. 'We're not fans of encouraging homeowners to go it alone and not have enough insurance to replace their homes should the worst happen,' Morris said. 'People can't afford what they need, and that's the issue. Solving that problem isn't gonna be accomplished by just asking them to need less. It's like asking them to breathe less.' Lawmakers could be doing more to solve the problem and regulate the insurance industry, she said, adding that Braud's bill could spell disaster if too many Louisiana residents go underinsured or drop out of the property insurance market altogether. 'It encourages you to gamble in a way that is unsustainable and could lead to you losing your home,' Morris said. 'We learned those lessons after Katrina.' Braud's bill is scheduled for a conference committee on Wednesday in which a small group of lawmakers from both chambers try to work on a compromise to get the measure passed. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Yahoo
5 hours ago
- Yahoo
Federal cuts could impact SNAP in Georgia
ATLANTA (WJBF) – Federal lawmakers in the House of Representatives want to cut the budget for programs like the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), also known as food stamps. The cuts could impact low income Georgia families who rely on the benefits and make it harder for them to buy groceries. The Department of Agriculture says around 13 percent of Georgia's population, or 1.4 million people receive snap benefits every month. The Georgia budget and policy institute says the average SNAP benefit is about $6.20 per day. The bill would require starts to share the cost of the program and also cut staff which could mean state lawmakers could axe the program altogether and that could impact students from low-income families. 'These children and their most nutritious meals come from school breakfast and school breakfast and school lunch. This summer they are not receiving any of that and if those benefits are cut our children will receive less nutrition because their families will not have the resources and we know that nutrition directly impacts our students ability to learn,' said Lisa Morgan, President of The Georgia Association of Educators. The federal legislation proposes that states like Georgia pay a 5 percent share or about $162 million dollars starting in January 2028. Data shows that Georgia ranks 20th in the country based on its population of receiving SNAP benefits. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
