I finished that editorial and it was not that earth shaking. But it does agree with my point about Jindal being more concerned about talking points than what is best for Louisiana. I'd like to see a true data set the measures how much time he actually spent governing Louisiana vs. out of state fund raising for himself.
My last comment was a joke, of course, but your spot on with job growth. And it's nice to see the economy finally getting back on the rails....knock on wood.
The only time a governor really needs to be around is during a Legislative session and during an emergency. The other 45 weeks out of the year the governor is just a cheerleader.
I think that line of thought is a problem. He could have at least spent time trying to marshal support for his economic package that included getting rid of the movie tax credits. He had to abandon that before the legislative session even started. He wasn't even a cheerleader for his own package. Even Weiner is a better cheerleader for his "Package"
He also could have "Governed" by taking some time to organize a change in the constitution that allowed cuts across the board to balance the budget...so pork could be cut as well as Health and education. But apparently that is out of the purview of someone whose political self interests are way more important than the common good.
The mark of a good leader is passing what he can and not wasting time on things that he can get no support for.He did spend time marshalling support for his economic package. He found out that this would not pass and instead of wasting time and taxpayer money on it, he got rid of it. Sounds like a guy who is willing to do the will of the people to me. Isn't that what politicians are supposed to do? You make it sound like changing the Constitution is as easy as writing a memo.
I don't know much about Jindal other than what I get from national news sources, which are slanted one way or another. That said, I would think Jindal would likely be more in the VP conversation. IMO Chris Christie or Jeb Bush would make the most viable candidate for the Republicans with an up and comer like Jindal or Rubio for VP.
1 Delegate???? he did not delegate. Jindal is an absentee lone ranger who delegated nothing to anyone. I don't remember his floor leader being quoted in the papers. I don't remember his floor leader trying to rally support for his economic package. The republican/conservative legislature read all the polls showing Obama was more popular than Jindal....and he bacame a pariah. That's why he abandoned ship instead of trying to pass his economic package. He knew he was going to be a loser. -It wouldn't have been easy at all, but he could have at least given the same lip service he gave other issues. He seems to prefer decimating health care and education instead of pet projects. And he definitely prefers positioning himself for national positions that are products of day dreams and fantasies. So if he blew that glaring need off, why didn't he lift a finger to ferret out Medicaid and SNAP fraud. A real conservative would want to cut waste...he did nothing. I am a true conservative voter. I hold bad politicians accountable. I don't make excuses for abrogation of responsibility.
You are way off base here. He proposed a plan weeks ahead of the session. When the tax swap plan did not garner the support it needed, he backed away from his vision and gave the legislature alternate avenues to pursue tax reform. On top of his suggestions he said he would sign any tax measure that was revenue neutral and lessened the administrative burdens inherent to taxation. Say what you will, but his tax package was very ambitious. His strategy to go for it all, and settle for some didn't work out so well, but this legislative session was very atypical. It was very much about the legislature flexing muscle. He has given a lot more than lip service to the idea of necessary constitutional changes in order to protect healthcare and higher ed. He has written dozens of opinion pieces on the matter. There is no popular support in the legislature for a constitutional convention. Attempts have failed to make it out of committee in the last 2 fiscal session. As a Certified Fraud Examiner and a Certified Internal Auditor I can assure you it is never cost effective to try and detect fraud. Never. The control environments in both Medicaid and SNAP are pretty tight, and fraud is minimal. I have audited dozens of Medicaid programs, and can tell you the controls are fairly solid. Federal programs, based on my experience are also generally well controlled. Defrauding these types of programs requires collusion which is impossible to detect with normal audit techniques. A forensic examination is necessary, and those are expensive, and produce little return.
