Louisiana lawmakers might shield campaign spending on constitutional amendments, tax proposals
Voters talk outside a polling place at Edward Hynes Charter School in New Orleans' Lakeview neighborhood on Nov. 8, 2022. (Greg LaRose/Louisiana Illuminator)
Louisiana lawmakers might eliminate requirements that political donations and spending on constitutional amendments, tax millages and other election propositions be made available to the public. The change would result in voters knowing less about who is working to pass or defeat ballot measures they are asked to consider. Rep. Mark Wright, R- Covington, chairman of the House Republican Caucus, has sponsored House Bill 596. It would make dozens of changes to Louisiana campaign finance reporting laws, including one to end finance reporting requirements for a 'proposition or question to be submitted to the voters.' Should his bill pass, campaign contributions and political spending in an election that doesn't involve a candidate would not have to be made public. The change would apply to proposed state constitutional amendments, property tax measures, local government charter changes and gambling legalization initiatives, among other referenda. The fundraising and spending for Gov. Jeff Landry's failed constitutional amendments on taxes, spending and criminal justice would have been kept secret if these law changes had been in place. Political advertising buys for a controversial ballot measure that established the city of St. George in East Baton Rouge Parish also would have been unknown.
Transparency about campaign spending on property tax hikes and renewals – such as one that failed Saturday for the East Baton Rouge District Attorney's Office and one that narrowly passed for the Orleans Parish Sheriff's Office – also wouldn't be required anymore. Stephen Gelé, a private attorney who handles campaign finance and ethics reports for the governor, helped write the legislation. Onerous campaign finance reporting requirements for ballot measures outweigh the good they provide, he said.
SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
'The minimal benefits of mandating the reporting of spending on ballot measures – considering the difficulty in enforcement and lack of significant risk of corruption from such spending – is outweighed by the cost of the heavy burden imposed on the constitutional right to free speech by such mandates,' Gelé said in a written statement Sunday. Individuals and business interests might be less likely to contribute to a particular ballot measure campaign if they know their identity will be disclosed, according to Gelé. Allowing citizens to remain anonymous encourages more participation in the political process, he said.
The reasons for mandating transparency on political contributions and spending on candidates also don't necessarily apply to ballot measures, Gelé said, because a ballot measure can't be corrupted or bribed like a candidate.
Advocates for government transparency are concerned, however. Steven Procopio with the Public Affairs Research Council of Louisiana, said his organization opposes the change and believes it would be a 'step back' for the state, which has been trying to ditch its reputation for sleazy politics.
'I not only think it is a bad idea, I can't believe the citizens won't be angry when they find out about it,' Procopio said in an interview Friday. Louisiana's campaign finance reporting laws for ballot measures are already weak and make it nearly impossible to figure out who is funding the campaigns surrounding those propositions. For example, the groups opposing and supporting the four constitutional amendments on the March 29 ballot spent more than $1 million combined. Who provided the money for the campaigns wasn't clear, however, because the requirements for donor disclosure for ballot propositions are easy to skirt. The two largest spenders on the March amendments did not reveal who was paying for their amendment campaign efforts.
SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
The Vera Institute of Justice spent at least $400,000 on a campaign to defeat Amendment 3, which would have made it easier to send more minors to adult prisons. Based in New York City, Vera took in more than $260 million over the past two years but is not required, as a 501(c)(3) nonprofit under the federal tax code, to disclose its contributors.
Likewise, a 'social welfare' organization called Protect Louisiana Values that was set up to support Landry spent $300,000 to back Amendment 2, which would have made dozens of tax and budget changes to the Louisiana Constitution. It is a 501(c)(4) nonprofit – sometimes referred to as a 'dark money' political organization by critics – and also doesn't have to reveal its donors.
Should Wright's legislation pass, not only would donors for proposition campaigns no longer be disclosed, but the amount of money being spent and the campaign vendors being paid for advertising and other organization efforts also wouldn't be known. Landry is pushing for the proposal right after he spent weeks trying to blame billionaire philanthropist George Soros for the March amendments' failure. The governor has repeatedly claimed Soros funded the opposition campaign, though Landry hasn't provided evidence to support the assertion. Public finance records are also too vague to determine whether Soros was involved.
A Hungarian-born Holocaust survivor, Soros is a major donor to liberal causes and has served as a bogeyman for conservatives for years. He never claimed to be involved in the Louisiana election, though he openly spent millions on a Wisconsin Supreme Court race that took place just a few days later in April.
'There was a lot of misinformation and straight-up lies about where the money for the Amendment 3 campaign came from,' Sarah Omojola with the Vera Institute said. 'So I find it interesting that this [bill] is coming forward now.' Republican leaders in the Legislature are attempting to put another proposal to change the state's tax and budget structure back on the ballot within the next year. In its new iteration, it consists of multiple constitutional amendments. Should Wright's legislation pass, the campaign operations surrounding those new constitutional amendments would be largely a secret. His bill is expected to come up for an initial vote Wednesday in the Louisiana House and Governmental Affairs Committee.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
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
7 hours ago
- Yahoo
Gov. Landry vetoes Senate oversight for his Port of New Orleans board choices
Barges and ships navigate the Mississippi River near Gramercy, Louisiana, on May 1, 2025. (Wes Muller/Louisiana Illuminator) A bill that attempted to add a layer of legislative oversight to the governor's picks for the Port of New Orleans board was officially sunk Monday with Gov. Landry's veto pen. Senate Bill 89 by Sen. Joseph Bouie, D-New Orleans, would have required the Senate to approve the governor's picks for members of the Board of Commissioners of the Port of New Orleans. The measure received unanimous approval from both chambers of the legislature. Currently, the governor has sole authority to choose port board members nominated by a coalition of organizations from Orleans, Jefferson and St. Bernard Parish. The nominating organizations are made up of university leaders, trade associations and local chambers of commerce. Members of the board serve for five-year terms. Landry cited 'an unnecessary layer of bureaucracy' as grounds for nixing the bill in his veto message, saying the port board selection process was sufficiently rigorous. 'Appointments are locally driven, carefully vetted, and rooted in industry expertise and community representation,' reads Landry's veto message. 'Adding a Senate confirmation requirement would complicate a system that already includes substantial input, oversight, and structure.' The Port Board of Commissioners is made up of four members from New Orleans, three from Jefferson Parish and one from St. Bernard Parish. As the sixth-largest port in the United States, the Port of New Orleans handles shipments of hundreds of cargo types, from consumer goods such as coffee, clothes and food to industrial materials including metals, wood and rubber. A major hub of global commerce, the Port of New Orleans ships more than 74 million tons of goods a year, according to a 2025 U.S. Bureau of Transportation Statistics report.
Yahoo
9 hours ago
- Yahoo
Sharing an elected Louisiana leader's personal info could soon result in fines, jail time
A legislative proposal originally intended to provide an additional layer of security to judges and prosecutors who deal with violent criminals has been altered to shield a broad range of personal information about state elected officials in Louisiana. (Wes Muller/Louisiana Illuminator) A legislative proposal originally intended to provide an additional layer of security to judges and prosecutors who deal with violent criminals has been altered to shield a broad range of personal information about state elected officials in Louisiana. Free speech and good government advocates are concerned officials could use the law, which will take effect unless the governor vetoes the proposal, to silence critics, punish journalists and keep unfavorable information out of the public's hands. Last week, the legislature gave final approval to House Bill 681 by Rep. Marcus Bryant, D-New Iberia, after Sen. Caleb Kleinpeter, R-Port Allen, added last-minute amendments to include statewide elected officials, members of the Public Service Commission and state lawmakers under an existing state law that shields their personal information from being made public. The amended version of the bill passed the Senate on a 36-0 vote and the House on an 89-0 vote. The law prevents the elected officials' home addresses, phone numbers, personal email addresses, Social Security numbers, driver's license numbers, federal tax identification numbers, bank account numbers, credit and debit card numbers, license plate numbers from being published in government records or on a public website. Also protected under the law are marital records and birthdates. An official's church, the school or daycare their child attends and the employment location of their spouse, children or dependents would also be shielded. 'It's incredibly concerning and broad … in a way I cannot describe because I don't yet know how bad it's going to be,' said attorney Scott Sternberg, who works on First Amendment cases, adding that such prosecutions would likely be unconstitutional. If Gov. Jeff Landry allows the proposal to become law, the newly included elected officials could request their personal information be removed from public records. It could also be used to force someone to remove an online post with personal information about the elected officials. For example, the law could be wielded against somebody who raises concerns about conflicts of interest pertaining to the employment of an elected official's spouse or child. If that person does not comply, they can be sued and face misdemeanor charges that carry up to 90 days in prison, a $1,000 fine or both. The bill could allow the sealing of marital records to prevent the public from learning of allegations of abuse in a divorce proceeding. 'In Louisiana's constitution … we have decided the people are entitled to certain information, because … the people have learned to check up on the government every now and then,' Sternberg said. 'Whenever an exception [to public records law] passes … it limits the public's right to access,' Sternberg added. Broadening the scope of the bill without public debate troubles good governance advocates. 'Slipping such a significant public records exemption into a bill with little acknowledgment and no debate raises questions about what people are trying to hide and undermines transparency,' said Steven Procopio, president of Public Affairs Research Council of Louisiana. Lawmakers and other individuals involved in Bryant's legislation have not been willing to say how the last-minute amendments got into the bill. 'These bills are not mine. I'm just bringing them,' Bryant said in an interview, referring questions to Zach Daniels, executive director of the Louisiana District Attorneys Association, who declined to comment for this report. Insurance Commissioner Tim Temple said he asked to have statewide elected officials added to the bill but not state lawmakers or Public Service Commission members. Temple said billboards bearing his home address have been put up around the state, prompting his request. Senate President Cameron Henry, R-Metairie, said he did not ask for the amendments but supports them. Public Service Commissioner Davante Lewis, D-Baton Rouge, posted on social media he had 'no clue' how PSC members were added, adding he did not support the legislation. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE