He's the friggin' governor. The legislature is supposed to be kissing HIS ass. In Louisiana, you can't get anything done without the governor, he has most of the cards. He's going to get his way most of the time. This governor wants ALL of his party agenda passed, so he's cut a deal with the legislature even though it puts him at odds with the people. I don't think he's thought this through clearly. The checks and balances don't work when the executive and the legislature cut private deals and cut out the public.
Since I'm out of state, I have not been following this issue as much as you guys, but is a raise from like 16k to 32k that unreasonable? I'm hate government waste as well, but it sounds like 32k is barely what an entry level college grad would make... Am I missing something here? Not defending it, just curious why this is such a hotbutton issue in LA?
1. It's a part-time job and the salary is more than twice what the average Louisiana worker gets for a full-time job. 2. Regular state employees can't get a raise of more than 20%, even when deserved, these guys wanted 300% and settles for 200%. 3. They did it in a year that they did not give raises to state employees and retirees and they cut funding to higher education. 4. They had a huge budget surplus because of high oil prices and instead of paying down state debt as required by law, or addressing the 14 billion shortfall in state highway funding (our roads are falling apart), they spent it on the usual pork. 5. The legislature only gives cost-of living raises to state employees at odd intervals and retirees seldome get more than 3% in a 10-year period. But they just gave themselves a salary that gets adjusted annually to the COL index. That's if it goes up. If it goes down, they don't get reduced one cent. 6. Most of all, Louisiana is still hurting from Katrina and has a lot of problems more pressing than this issue and the people think the legislators are out of touch. Our roads suck, our schools suck, our colleges are underfunded, our bridges and public buildings are falling apart. No one says they should never get a raise, but they should play by the rules that other state employees have to follow.
If he Veto's the bill, couldn't the house just over-ride his veto? Thats how it works here in S.C...been a while since I had a class on Louisiana Law. So....it may not be Jindel here to blame, but your rep in the house. What purpose would it give Jindel to veto this when they will just waste more time on the issue and over-ride his veto.
It would show that he doesn't break his specific campaign promise to the people that he would veto this legislation. He hasn't been if office for a year and he has already told us to kiss his ass, he has politics to conduct.
it would also give the legislators that have been taking heat a chance to do the right thing and not over-ride the veto. just because a bill passes initially doesnt mean that there are enough votes to over-ride a veto. and as red said, it puts the gov on the right side (according to most of his constituents) of the issue and gives him political advantage with the voters. even if it is over-ridden, he can stand up and say he did the right thing. opponents will use this against him in the next election, too. you can bank on that!
I agree, though I wonder if giving pay raises will attract more competent representatives, which would be a good thing. All the points Red raised do seem relevant, however.
