TRUMP AND LOUISIANA’S “CROOKED ELECTIONS”!

Thursday, March 31^st, 2016

Baton Rouge, Louisiana

TRUMP AND LOUISIANA’S “CROOKED ELECTIONS”!

Donald Trump said he was stunned, shocked and livid about how elections are run way down in the Bayou State.  He minced no words in giving his assessment of what happened in the recent Louisiana presidential primary.  “ It tells you what a crooked system we have and what a rotten political system we have.  I won Louisiana, but what’s going on in the Republican Party is a disgrace.”

Delegates in Louisiana were supposed to have been allocated based on what percentage of the popular vote each candidate received.  Trump received 41.5% of the vote and Senator Ted Cruise garnered a second place 37.8%.  But when the delegates were divvied up, Cruise was given 7 delegates where Trump only received 6 delegates. Foul play argued Trump, and the front-runner for the Republican presidential nomination has threatened to sue.  Welcome to the world of Louisiana politics Mr. Trump.

Rarely does an election take place down in the deepest of the deep southern states without allegations of some type of voter fraud. To this day, former Lt. Governor and gubernatorial candidate Jimmy Fitzmorris still sulks that his 1979 defeat in the governor’s race was caused by voter fraud. Republican Woody Jenkins still claims that his 1996 bid to defeat Senator Mary Landrieu was caused by a massive vote buying effort, particularly in New Orleans.

Vote buy and election fraud are, for all practical purposes, a thing of the past in Louisiana, although an occasional complaint is filed in local elections.  But in days gone by, there were a number of creative ways to “stack” an election. Down in Plaquemines Parish below New Orleans, folks still remember the days of political boss Leander Perez, when there were often more votes cast then there were voters in the parish.

It used to be much tougher to absentee vote, with the average parish voting 5 to 10% absentee.  When 40% of a parish voted before Election Day, you knew something was fishy.  A local sheriff, or other official so inclined, would have his deputies haul voters into the courthouse.  He would send in the first voter with a blank sheet of paper shaped like an absentee voter’s ballot.  The voter was told to put the blank paper in the ballot box, then bring back the official but unmarked ballot.  For this effort, the first and subsequent voters were paid the going rate, generally 10 to 20 dollars.

The next voter would go to the clerk’s office with an official ballot that was pre-checked by the person buying the votes. The voter took the marked ballot into the clerk’s office, and was given an unmarked ballot.  The voter put his marked ballot in the ballot box, then brought his unmarked ballot back to receive his money.  So with only one initial ballot, someone so disposed could run voters in and out of the clerk’s office day after day while absentee voting was taking place, pay them the going rate, and pile up votes for the favored candidates.

Another way to garner votes was to station a “helper” in the voting precinct to aid any voter who asked for assistance.  Many less informed voters would say they needed aid and the “helper” was allowed in the voting booth with the voter.  I remember back in one of my early races that a “helper” bragged to me after the election that I had received 217 votes out of 220 that were cast in a precinct where he was well known and who “helped” everyone that came in to vote.  He had a big grin when he told me how he had assisted my campaign.  My response: “What happened to the other three?”

The days of blatant and widespread voter fraud has been greatly curtailed, although not eliminated.  The message to the Donald Trumps of the world is to keep a close eye on the election process when you are a candidate.  Former Governor Earl Long summed it up pretty well with two of his more memorable quotations:  The first was “I can make them voting machines sing Home Sweet Home.”  Since he controlled the election process, he probably could.

But his most endearing quote rang home to many Bayou State politicians.  Earl’s missive was “When I die, I want to be buried in Louisiana, so that I can stay active in politics.”

Peace and Justice

Jim Brown

Jim Brown’s syndicated column appears each week in numerous newspapers throughout the nation and on websites worldwide.  You can read all his past columns and see continuing updates at http://www.jimbrownusa.com.  You can also hear Jim’s nationally syndicated radio show each Sunday morning from 9:00 am till 11:00 am Central Time on the Genesis Radio Network, with a live stream at http://www.jimbrownusa.com.

FROM CESSPOOL TO HOT TUB IN LOUISIANA POLITICS!

Thursday, March 24^th, 2016

Baton Rouge, Louisiana

FROM CESSPOOL TO HOT TUB IN LOUISIANA POLITICS!

Who cares about any budget crisis in Louisiana?  After all, it’s important that the Bayou State’s new governor and legislature set priorities.  And they apparently have.  They were not able to balance the state budget in a recent special session.  But many lawmakers were quite busy raising campaign dollars for future elections and other political activities.

When these officials were running for office, the state capitol was pictured as nothing but a cesspool of special interests gaining particular favors and tax breaks at the public’s expense.  But once in office, the cesspool apparently has been turned into a hot tub where legislators are wined and dined, and the campaign dollars abundantly flow. 

Although in office for two months, 42 legislators have held fundraisers during the recent special session.  The president of the Louisiana Oil and Gas Association, Don Briggs, was quoted in the Advocate recently saying:  “We approach them. They approach us.  There is not a legislator over there that doesn’t have fundraisers.”  So it’s politics, as usual, at the state capitol.

Louisiana’s new governor is not above the fray in raking up the campaign cash, particularly from his opponents.  Gov. John Bel Edwards was blistered in criticism when he was campaigning this past fall by oil and gas, chemical industry, LABI and various other business interests.  But once in office, the new governor made no bones about why he was calling on his adversaries to cough up campaign funds.  “They opposed me last year, and I’m governor this year,” he was quoted as saying.  So to be in the political mix, the governor seems to be saying that you have to “pay to play.”

More than one half of current legislators were elected without any opposition.  And all of them had a significant campaign war chest built up.  It’s no secret that in the overwhelming majority of elections held in Louisiana, there are three key elements in getting elected. The first is lots of campaign dollars. The second is more campaign dollars. And I’ve forgotten the third.

Louisiana regularly ranks as the most expensive state for campaign spending per capita, in the nation. Out-of-state corporate and special interest money regularly floods into the campaign coffers of Louisiana candidates. In his bid for reelection four years ago, former Gov. Bobby Jindal had more contributions from outside Louisiana then from within. One might wonder why almost 1000 California contributors were so interested in Louisiana issues.

There is a simple and constitutional way to keep Louisiana elected officials focused on Louisiana issues. A candidate for public office should only raise campaign funds in the district from where he or she is running.  If a candidate is running statewide, he or she should raise all their financial resources within the state.  If a candidate is running parish wide, the limits should be within the home district.  Legislators would be limited to raising campaign dollars from within their respective districts.  Simple.  Keep fund raising local.  Make the candidates focus and be responsive solely to the voters in the boundaries that put them in office.

To be sure, there would be loud protests from lobbyists who hand out the campaign dollars to gain their “special access.”  And incumbents, who can work the system from day one in office, would object at having to forgo all the many out-of-district fund raising

opportunities.  The voters would be the beneficiaries.  But don’t count on any groundswell of change. 

The recent Citizens United Supreme Court decision was touted as a catalyst for major campaign changes.  But as long as out of state money floods into any state, it’s going to be the same old, same old in both Baton Rouge and Washington.  Remember the 1960s song by The Who called “Won’t be Fooled Again?”  There’s a line that goes:  “Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.”  The more there is talk of change at the state capitol, the more it would seem to stay the same.

********

People used to complain that selling a campaign was like selling a bar of soap. But when you buy soap, at least you get the soap. In this campaign, you just get two guys telling you they really value cleanliness. — David Brooks

Peace and Justice

Jim Brown

Jim Brown’s syndicated column appears each week in numerous newspapers throughout the nation and on websites worldwide.  You can read all his past columns and see continuing updates at http://www.jimbrownusa.com.  You can also hear Jim’s nationally syndicated radio show each Sunday morning from 9:00 am till 11:00 am Central Time on the Genesis Radio Network, with a live stream at http://www.jimbrownusa.com.

LSU SHOULD NOT BE A QUITTER!

March 17^th, 2016

Baton Rouge, Louisiana

LSU SHOULD NOT BE A QUITTER!

Is LSU a quitter? When the pressures mount, and things just don’t go as planned, are there too many instances where the state’s flagship university seems to walk away and pull the plug, with the hopes that the problem will just go away? I have written a number of columns over the years about the highs and lows of the state’s flagship university and how, in the academic world, the administration has thrown good people under the bus. But I never thought I would see the day when a Tiger athletic team just gave up and quit.

It’s common knowledge to LSU basketball fans this week that the basketball program just quit.  Yes, they experienced a complete meltdown in their final SEC game, scoring few points and playing worse than in any fan’s memory.  They plummeted from first place in the conference to being completely out of the running for a chance to play in the current NCAA tournament.

The consolation prize was to go to the secondary National Invitational Tournament that gives the players a final shot at redemption and a chance to begin the foundation for next year’s season. But the powers that be in the LSU athletic department just said no.  Shut it down.  Don’t let these young men continue to play the game they love that gives them a free education.  Pick up your basketball and go home. Just quit.

This is not the first time the athletic department almost gave up.  A few months ago, rumors flew that football coach Les Miles was on his way out.  He did have a bumpy ending to this past season, losing his final three conference games.  Forget the fact Miles has the highest percentage of wins in LSU history, along with winning a national championship, two SEC championships, and running one of the most financially successful football programs in the country.

Reliable sources have confirmed that the job was offered to Florida State Coach Jimbo Fisher early in the week before Thanksgiving.  But on that Wednesday, Fox News and the Orlando Sentinel reported that there have been as many as 40 cases involving Seminole football players being accused of rape and other incidents of "intimate-partner” violence. This put the quietus on Miles being fired, as LSU President King Alexander insisted that the current coach be retained.

In the LSU academic world, there have been a number of high profile instances where the university has “pulled the plug” and fired competent professors under questionable circumstances.  The high cost of suppressing academic freedom was exemplified in the case of LSU coastal researcher Ivor van Heerden.  He blew the whistle on the efforts by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to blame Hurricane Katrina for the massive damage caused throughout south Louisiana by calling it a “a natural disaster.”  LSU officials were more concerned about big dollar research contracts from the Corps, and fired Dr. van Heerden.  He justifiably sued, and the decision cost LSU over $1 million; seriously tarnishing the university’s reputation nationally.

LSU researcher Dr. Steven Hatfill got the same treatment when he was fired by LSU after the FBI investigated him as a potential anthrax terrorist.  Such allegations were absurd since his laboratory research had involved Ebola and other viruses, not anthrax.  The charges were baseless, but LSU immediately fired Hatfill without giving him any benefit of the doubt. The Justice Department eventually admitted they made a big mistake and paid Hatfill $4.6 million to compensate for ruining his reputation. Again, LSU’s priority was to quit on him and protect their federal contracts.

LSU should be the state’s outstanding flagship. “A number one, Top of the heap” as the song goes. Three of my kids went to LSU, and my wife is a proud alumna.  But the University can’t be a defeatist.  And it cannot in good conscience quit on those who work for and represent LSU. Not in sports or academics.  There is a loyalty quotient here that involves a commitment to the fans, to the faculty and to taxpayers.  There is a duty to stay in the game, fight the good fight and stand up for those who are working to make LSU a top tier university.  But it has to be loyal, and it can’t ever be a quitter.  That, in some cases, is a lesson still to be learned.

********

“Winners never quit and quitters never win.”

 - Vince Lombardi

Peace and Justice

Jim Brown

Jim Brown’s syndicated column appears each week in numerous newspapers throughout the nation and on websites worldwide.  You can read all his past columns and see continuing updates at http://www.jimbrownusa.com.  You can also hear Jim’s nationally syndicated radio show each Sunday morning from 9:00 am till 11:00 am Central Time on the Genesis Radio Network, with a live stream at http://www.jimbrownusa.com.

SHOULD FEDS HAVE RIGHT TO BREAK INTO YOUR IPHONE?

March 10^th, 2016

Baton Rouge, Louisiana

SHOULD FEDS HAVE RIGHT TO BREAK INTO YOUR IPHONE?

It sounds like a pretty straightforward request. The FBI wants to open up a criminal’s iPhone to see if a future crime can be stopped.  This is the scenario of the San Bernardino shooter, who certainly forfeited his privacy rights when he died in a shootout with police.  So why are Apple and privacy advocates in court trying to stop the FBI from opening up the information in the shooter’s phone?

If it were only that simple.  The problem is that there presently is no way to get information out of the iPhone in question. The FBI could have done so initially, but the largest and most sophisticated criminal investigation agency in the world bumbled an attempt to reset the phone’s password destroying any chance of gathering the phone data.  The agency’s own negligence locked instead of unlocking the phone.

So now, the FBI has gone to federal court in an attempt to get an order that will force Apple not just to open one iPhone, but to create and develop a whole new software that will disable security protection on all iPhones. Apple’s response is that the FBI is attempting to force their company to build an entire new system, and that such a system will jeopardize the privacy of millions of Americans and private companies worldwide.

No evidence is available that indicates there is any information on the San Bernardino iPhone to aid the criminal investigation.  It’s a fishing expedition. The FBI lost the chance to open up the phone themselves through their own carelessness. So the Agency is willing to cast aside any concerns for the Constitution, the Bill of Rights and both the 4th and 5^th Amendments, all in an effort to promote their notion that the end justifies the means.

The attorney for Apple appeared before Congress last week and testified Apple had explained to the FBI how to gather the requested iPhone data by simply connecting the phone to a known Wi-Fi connection used by the shooter.  But the FBI chose to attempt to change the password.  Republican Representative Jason Chaffetz from Utah asked FBI Director James Comey, “With all due respect to the FBI, they didn’t do what Apple had suggested they do in order to retrieve the data, correct?  I mean, when they went to change the password that kind of screwed things up, did it not?”

In a recent Republican presidential debate, Sen. Marco Rubio stated that Apple was being asked “to crack one phone in the entire world.”  This is of course false.  Apple is being ordered to build an entirely new system that will allow the decryption of all iPhones worldwide.  Hackers have already broken into the Social Security database and computers of numerous federal agencies. Do we want to put at risk the nation’s most sensitive data?

And what about the ineptitude of our national defense system?  Why is the National Security Agency incapable of setting up a decryption unit that has the ability to hack into an iPhone without calling on Apple’s help?  This raises serious questions about gathering information on terrorism by the NSA.

Former FBI agent Coleen Rowley was a guest on my syndicated radio program last week.  She criticized her former agency for concentrating on merely gathering more and more information without effectively using the intelligence that is readily available. “Instead of trying to find the needle in a haystack to solve crimes, the present system just piles on more hay.”  What Rowley is telling us is that our protectors have become obsessed with information gathering, but have failed to follow the path of much information readily available.

Interestingly, the husband of one of the San Bernardino shooting victims is siding with Apple’s concerns.  He told a federal court: “Neither I, nor my wife, wants to raise our children in a world where privacy is the trade-off for security.”

As the Wall Street Journal editorialized in favor of Apple’s concerns, “If the government can compel a manufacturer to invent intellectual property that does not exist in order to invade its own lawful products, then there is no limiting legal principle.”  That should be a concern for every American.

Peace and Justice

Jim Brown

Jim Brown’s syndicated column appears each week in numerous newspapers throughout the nation and on websites worldwide.  You can read all his past columns and see continuing updates at http://www.jimbrownusa.com.  You can also hear Jim’s nationally syndicated radio show each Sunday morning from 9:00 am till 11:00 am Central Time on the Genesis Radio Network, with a live stream at http://www.jimbrownusa.com.