>>> SUPPORT FOR THIS PROGRAM IS
PROVIDED BY THE FOUNDATION FOR
EXCELLENCE IN LOUISIANA PUBLIC
BROADCASTING AND FROM VIEWERS
LIKE YOU.
>>> HELLO AND WELCOME TO
"LOUISIANA PUBLIC SQUARE," I'M
BETH COURTNEY, PRESIDENT OF
LOUISIANA PUBLIC BROADCASTING.
>> AND I'M ROBERT TRAVIS SCOTT,
PRESIDENT OF THE PUBLIC AFFAIRS
RESEARCH COUNCIL OF LOUISIANA.
AFTER JOHN BEL EDWARDS IN
AUGURATION, HE CALLED PEOPLE TO
TAKE ACTION ON A $2 BILLION
SHORTFALL.
>> THEY GOT TO WORK AFTER
VALENTINE'S DAY AND WORKED
THROUGH A SPECIAL SESSION AND
ANOTHER THREE-WEEK SPECIAL
SESSION.
>> THEY WERE CORRECTING HASTY
LAWS THAT WERE PASSED.
>> THEY WERE IN SESSION A VERY
LONG TIME.
HOW DID THE LENGTH OF TIME AT
THE CAPITOL AFFECT THE LAWS
BEING MADE?
ARE THE STATE'S SPENDING
PRIORITIES IN THE RIGHT PLACE?
OVER THE NEXT HOUR, WE'LL HEAR
FROM FAMILIES WHO RELY ON STATE
SERVICES FOR THEIR CHILDREN,
LAWMAKERS WHO CALLED THE SHOTS
AND BUSINESS OWNERS CONCERNED.
WE'LL TALK ABOUT THIS ON
"REGULAR AND EXTRAORDINARY:
LEGISLATIVE REVIEW."
>>> OF ALL THE FUNDING DECISIONS
LAWMAKERS MADE DURING THE THREE
SESSIONS THIS YEAR, THE STATE'S
COLLE
COLLEGE SCHOLARSHIP PROGRAM,
"TOPS," WILL SEE THE BIGGEST
CUT.
>> WE DO HAVE A BALANCED BUDGET
BUT THE POINT IS, WE DO NOT HAVE
ENOUGH MONEY TO FUNDS EVERYTHING
THAT HAVE BEEN FUNDED IN THE
PREVIOUS YEAR.
THERE WILL BE CUTS UPON VARIOUS
STATE AGEAGENCIES.
>> THEY WERE ALLOCATED 70% OF
THEY NEED.
THEY WOULD FULLY FUND IT IN THE
FULL SEMESTER.
COLLEGE STUDENTS AND THEIR
PARENTS MAY HAVE TO COME UP WITH
THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS IN TUITION.
LAWMAKERS WERE WILLING TO TAKE
THAT BET BECAUSE THEY THINK
THERE'S POTENTIALLY MORE MONEY
ON THE WAY.
ZORA NEALE LEADS THE COMMITTEE.
HE SAID AS MUCH AFTER VOTING TO
PUT RESTRICTIONS.
>> THERE ARE MANY, MANY
OPPORTUNITIES THAT EXIST.
THE [INDISCERNIBLE] SO WE'RE
GOING TO GENERATE ALREADY FROM
THE PRICE OF OIL.
>> ABRAMSON SAID HE THOUGHT SOME
OF THE ONES PASSED WOULD BRING
IN MORE MONEY.
>> FROM A LEGISLATURE'S
STANDPOINT, OBVIOUSLY, TO REDUCE
THE TAXES OR MONEY TO BE RAISED
IN NEW TAXES, YOU WANT TO SAY,
WE'RE GOING TO GET MONEY COMING
LATER ON.
WE HAVE TO BE CONSERVATIVE AND
WE GAUGE THOSE x
EXPECTATIONS.
SO KED UP,pxx
DID THE NUMBER OF VOTES
LAWMAKERS WERE ASKED.
THEY RAISED $1.5 BILLION.
TO ETHINK IT'S
.FOR OUR CONSTITUENTS@Q||
TOLD REPRESENTATIVE ROB
SHADOIN, WHO WAS PROMOTING A
REVENUE BILL AROUND WEEK 17,
THAT LAWMAKERS NEED TO SEE THE
DUST SETTLE.
>> IT'S JUST REALLY HARD FOR ME
TO GO BACK HOME BECAUSE I
HAVEN'T BEEN ABLE TO DO THAT
SINCE WE GET STARTED.
>> YOU MEAN, GO BACK HOME?
[LAUGHTER]
>> THE PEOPLE WHO ELECTED ME, I
FEEL THEIR PAIN RIGHT NOW.
>> IT WAS ECHOED BY STEPHEN
WAGUESPACK, PRESIDENT OF THE
LOUISIANA ASSOCIATION OF
BUSINESS AND INDUSTRY.
HE SAYS OIL PRICES HAVE CAUSED A
DOWNTURN IN THE ECONOMY.
>> THERE ARE JOBS OUT THERE THAT
ARE HURTING.
WE ARE 16,000 JOBS DOWN.
WE HAVE TO BE MINDFUL OF THAT.
WE HAVE BEEN HERE FOR SIX
MONTHS.
>> IT MADE IT DIFFICULT TO
CONSIDER TAX POLICY CHANGES THAT
SOME CONSIDER REFORM.
JULIE STOKES EXPRESSED
FRUSTRATION.
>> WE CAN'T STOP TALKING ABOUT
THIS BUDGET PROBLEM LONG ENOUGH
TO DO ANYTHING REALLY GOOD.
>> SENATE PRESIDENT JOHN ALARIO.
>> WE HAVE TO STABILIZE THE
REVENUE SOURCES AND TRY TO BE
FAIR.
>> DARDENNE SAYS THE BUDGET
FIRST NEEDED TO BE STABILIZED.
NEXT SESSION, THE ADMINISTRATION
IS GEARING UP TO MAKE STRUCTURAL
CHANGES.
>> THEY HAVE REVENUES UP AND
DOWN AND CHANGES IN ITS TAX CODE
THAT HAVEN'T BEEN STRUCTURAL
CHANGES.
THEY'VE BEEN CHANGES WE NEEDED
TO MAKE.
>> IN THE FIRST SPECIAL SESSION,
ON TO CKED ANOTHER
4% SALES TAX, MAKING MORE
GOODS TAXABLE.
THEY ACCIDENTALLY DOING OFF MORE
EXEMPTIONS THAN THEY WANTED TO,
THAT CAUSED MORE CONFUSION ON
PRODUCE.SH IT WOULD
IN THE 2018 SESSION, LAWMAKERS
WILL BE LOOKING AT LEAST $1.1
BILLION SHORTFALL IN FUNDING.
>> IT CREATES THIS TERRIBLE
CLIFF AND WE'RE IN THE SAME SOUP
OF HAVING THE CRISIS OF NOT
HAVING ADEQUATE AVENUE.
THE PLAN AND HOPE IS NEXT YEAR,
THE STRUCTURAL CHANGES WILL
ADDRESS THE CLIFF PROBLEM AND
UNDO SOME OF THE TEMPORARY
FIXES.
>> DARDENNE SAYS THEY ARE
WALKING A FINE LINE BETWEEN
BEING SENSITIVE TO THE ECONOMY.
>> IT IS A BALANCING ACT.
WHAT'S THE RIGHT MIX OF BEING
FAIR TO EVERYONE AND NOT BEING
LIKE THAT.
TO HAVE A BALANCE, BROAD-BASED
TAX STUCKTURE, YOU HAVE TO HIT
THE VARIOUS ENTITIES.
>> ALL EYES ON THE STUDY
COMMISSION LEAD BY DR. JIM
RICHARDSON.
THEY ARE EXPECTED TO RELEASE
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE TAX CODE
THIS FALL.
>> JOINING US TO EXPLORE THE
"REGULAR AND EXTRAORDINARY:
LEGISLATIVE REVIEW" IS OUR
STUDIO AUDIENCE, IT INCLUDES
COLLEGE STUDENTS, EDUCATORS AND
ACTIVISTS.
WE HAVE THE ADVISORY COUNCIL
FROM NEW ORLEANS AND RAYNE.
IT'S BEEN NOTED HOW DIFFICULT IT
WAS TO KEEP TRACK OF ALL THE
NUMBERS SURROUNDING THE SESSION.
SO LET'S START THERE.
HERE'S THE BEST APPLES TO APPLES
COMPARISON WE CAN MAKE BASED ON
THE FIGURES.
FOR THE NEW FISCAL YEAR, THE
STATE'S COLLEGES AND
UNIVERSITIES WILL SEE A 2%
INCREASE IN THEIR FUNDING OVER
LAST YEAR BY ABOUT $40 MILLION.
K THROUGH 12 WILL SEE A DROP OF
$16 MILLION.
THE LOUISIANA DEPARTMENT OF
HEALTH WILL SEE AN INCREASE OF
8%, $280 MILLION.
LAWMAKERS HAVE LEFT THE
DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS 1%
SHORT, $6 MILLION.
THOSE NUMBERS DON'T PAINT THE
ENTIRE PICTURE.
WHAT ELSE DO YOU THINK SHOULD
HAVE BEEN FUNDING?
WHAT TAX INCREASES ARE YOU
EXPECTING OR IS THIS A SPENDING
PROBLEM?
SO, TELL US ABOUT WHAT YOU
THINK?
YOU WERE MONITORING THIS AS PART
OF THE LOUISIANA BUDGET PROJECT,
IS THAT RIGHT?
>> I THINK FROM OUR PERSPECTIVE,
OUR BIGGEST CONCERN IS THAT THE
SOLUTIONS THAT WERE DEVELOPED
WILL CREATE A PROBLEM IN THE
NEXT COUPLE OF YEARS AND THAT
ALSO, WHILE THERE WEREN'T A LOT
OF OPTIONS FOR HOW TO FILL
BUDGET HOLES QUICKLY, THOSE THAT
WERE CHOSEN ARE OPTIONS THAT
AFFECT YOUR LOWEST INCOME FOLKS
IN THE STATE MORE THAN ANYONE
ELSE.
AND WHEN THERE WERE
OPPORTUNITIES TO PUT INTO PLACE
POLICIES THAT WOULD ACTUALLY
DISTRIBUTE THAT BURDEN WHERE
PROGRESSIVELY, LEGISLATURES WERE
UNWILLING TO PURSUE THEM.
>> SO YOU THINK THEY SHOULD HAVE
RAISED REVENUE IN DIFFERENT WAYS
AND NOT WITH THE SALES TAX?
DO YOU THINK THAT WAS A BAD
IDEA?
>> DEFINITELY WITH THE SALES
TAX.
>> IT SEEMS LIKE IT WAS A LOT OF
QUICK MONEY COMING UP THERE.
JAY, YOU ARE A BUSINESSMAN AND
REPRESENTING LOUISIANA
ASSOCIATION OF BUSINESS AND
INDUSTRY.
HOW DID YOU SEE THIS SESSION
GOING AND DO YOU AGREE WITH
JANAY?
>> TO A CERTAIN EXTENT.
THE LEGISLATURES WERE PUT IN A
VERY DIFFICULT POSITION IN A
VERY SHORT PERIOD OF TIME AND I
THINK THEIR GOAL WAS TO CREATE A
BRIDGE TO GET TO [INDISCERNIBLE]
FARM AND WHAT THEY DID, EVEN
THOUGH VERY DISTASTEFUL AND
UNPLEASANT AND COSTLY TO
BUSINESS AT A TIME AND
BUSINESSES ARE STRUGGLING, IT
WAS SOMETHING THAT HAD TO BE
DONE IN A SHORT-TERM BASIS WITH
THE REALITY THAT WE MUST DO
REFORM.
AND REFORM'S GOT TO TAKE PLACE
IN A REGULAR SESSION NEXT YEAR,
WHICH IS A FISCAL YEAR.
>> OKAY.
WELL, YOU KNOW -- YES, GO AHEAD,
EDGAR?
>> TO SAY THAT THE LEGISLATURE'S
PUT IN A POSITION FOR A SHORT
PERIOD IS MAYBE AN ACCURATE
STATEMENT BUT THIS DID NOT
HAPPEN IN A FIRST SPECIAL
SESSION.
IT HAS BEEN HAPPENING IN
PREVIOUS SESSIONS BEFORE.
>> IT HAS TAKING US YEARS TO GET
IN THIS BAD OF SHAPE, IS WHAT
YOU'RE SAYING?
>> ABSOLUTELY.
I AGREE THAT THE SALES TAX
INCREASE, THE MOST PROGRESSIVE
FOR PEOPLE WHO HAVE LOW INCOME
AND LITTLE MEANS.
OUR COMMUNITY, TOGETHER WITH
LOUISIANA, WE UNDERSTOOD -- WE
DIDN'T LIKE IT.
BUT THIS IS THE ONLY SOURCE OF
REVENUE YOU CAN GET QUICKLY.
WE NEEDED IT FOR THE LAST FISCAL
YEAR SO WE DIDN'T LIKE IT, BUT
WE DIDN'T OPPOSE IT BECAUSE THE
ADMINISTRATION HAD NOTHING --
>> QUICK REVENUE IS WHAT YOU'RE
SAYING.
NATHAN?
>> I HAVE TO AGREE WITH EDGAR'S
STATEMENT.
ANYBODY WHO THINKS THIS WOULD BE
A LONG-TERM FIX IS MAYBE FOOLING
THEMSELVES AND IT'S JUST A
BRIDGE TO GET TO THE TAX REFORM
OF THE NEXT SESSION.
IMPORTANTLY TO NOTE IS OVER
EIGHT YEARS OF CUTS OR THINGS
LIKE THAT, WE CAN'T LET THE NEW
NORMAL DEFINE OUR EXPECTATIONS
SO WHEN WE TALK ABOUT FUNDING
FROM THE PREVIOUS YEAR, FUNDING
FROM FOUR YEARS PRIOR, WE NEED
TO KEEP IN CHECK WHETHER THAT
WAS ACCEPTABLE TO BEGIN WITH.
>> YOU'RE FRESHLY GRADUATED
ECONOMIST.
>> YES.
>> WE HAVE STUDENTS HERE.
I'D LIKE TO HEAR FROM STUDENTS
ON WHAT THEIR VIEW IS --
PERSPECTIVE COLLEGE STUDENTS,
WHAT YOUR VIEW IS ON "TOPS."
ARE ANY OF YOU AFFECTED BY THIS
OR DO YOU HAVE A VIEW ABOUT
WHETHER THAT WAS A GOOD IDEA OR
NOT?
LAYA, TAYLOR?
>> I FEEL LIKE WE DON'T
NECESSARILY LIKE IT BUT WE DON'T
HAVE MUCH OF A CHOICE EITHER
BECAUSE THE CUTS CAN ONLY COME
FROM SO MANY PLACES.
>> AND IN OTHER WORDS, YOU
THOUGHT IT WAS A NATURAL
PLACE --
>> IT SHOULD BE BETTER.
WE SHOULDN'T HAVE TO CUT FROM
"TOPS"S AND HOSPITALS BUT THEY
HAD TO DO IT QUICK.
>> JUSTIN HERE IS BOTH A
STUDENT, COLLEGE STUDENT, AND HE
WAS A JOURNALIST WORKING THROUGH
THE MANSHIP SCHOOL, COVERING THE
SESSION.
SO, ARE YOU AFFECTED?
>> I JUST GRADUATED.
>> YOU GOT OUT JUST IN TIME.
[LAUGHTER]
>> I WROTE A COLUMN ABOUT MY
EXPERIENCE AT THE CAPITOL.
AYEAR AGO, I SAID WE SHOULD FUND
"TOPS."
IF MORE HOSPITALS ARE ON THE
CHOPPING BLOCK, I WOULD ARGUE
THAT "TOPS" SHOULD BE CUT
INSTEAD OF HOSPITALS.
ON TOP OF THAT, IF THE 2017
REGULAR SESSION DOES NOT PROVIDE
TAX CODE CHANGES AND STRUCTURAL
CHANGES ELSEWHERE WITHIN THE
CONSTITUTION, THEN "TOPS" AND
HIGHER EDUCATION WILL CONTINUEUE
TO BE PROBLEMS FOR OUR
LEGISLATURE TO FACE.
THE PROGRAM, AS IT STANDS TODAY,
REQUIRES ADDITIONAL REFORMS FOR
THAT TO HAPPEN.
>> ABOUT THAT, REBECCA, YOU ARE
A JOURNALIST COVERING -- YOU
COVERED THIS SESSION FOR THE
ADVOCATE.
DO YOU AGREE WITH THIS
ASSESSMENT?
>> I THINK IT'S WORTH NOTICE
THAT THIS IS THE FIRST TIME THAT
"TOPS" HAS BEEN CUT AND WE'VE
BEEN CUTTING THE STATE BUDGET
AGGRESSIVELY FOR EIGHT OR NINE
YEARS.
IT'S DEFINITELY BEEN A PRIORITY.
IT WAS DIFFICULT TO MAKE THAT
CUT.
IT SHOWS HOW SEVERE THINGS HAVE
GOTTEN.
>> WE'RE FORTUNATE TO HAVE SCOTT
WITH THE SCHOOL BOARD
ASSOCIATION.
SCOTT, I KNOW YOU HAVE A LOT TO
SAY ABOUT WHAT HAPPENED IN THIS
SESSION.
ARE YOU BETTER OFF?
ARE YOU WORSE OFF?
>> IT'S A SAD DAY IN LOUISIANA
WHEN K-12 PUBLIC EDUCATION IS
NOT PRIORITIZED AND NOT KEPT AT
LEAST THE SAME LEVEL OF FUNDING
FROM THE PREVIOUS YEAR.
ONE OF THE BIGGEST TAKE AWAYS
FROM THIS SESSION FOR ANYBODY
THAT'S A STAKEHOLDER IS THE FACT
THAT BASIC SERVICES AND STATE
GOVERNMENT WERE PITTED AGAINST
EACH OTHER.
HIGHER ED, HOSPITALS, CHILDREN
WITH SEVERE DISABILITIES, K-12
PUBLIC EDUCATION.
PRISON SERVICES.
BASIC SERVICES THAT STATES
PROVIDE WERE PITTED -- ACTUALLY
FIGHTING AGAINST EACH OTHER AT
THE END OF THE DAY, TO TRY TO
CHAMPION THEIR CAUSE TO MAINTAIN
THE SAME LEVEL OF FUNDING.
>> IT OFTEN ENDS UP THAT WAY,
THEY PIT ONE CONSTITUENTS
AGAINST ANOTHER.
LET'S TALK ABOUT HEALTHCARE.
WE HAVE A COUPLE OF FOLKS.
YOU HAVE A SPECIAL INTEREST IN
HEALTHCARE.
KELLY OR KAREN?
>> I HAVE A SON WHO HAS TWO
DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES, DOWN
SYNDROME AND AUTISM AND A HEART
DEFECT.
YOU MAY HAVE SEEN US AT THE
CAPITOL, ADVOCATING FOR
SERVICES, MEDICAID WAIVER
SERVICES FOR OUR KID.
>> A LOT OF PEOPLE DON'T GO WHAT
THAT MEANS.
>> MEDICAID WAIVER IS A WAIVER
OF REGULAR MEDICAID RULES TO
PROVIDE HELP AND SUPPORT TO
PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES OR
SPECIAL NEEDS.
>> HOW DO THINKS COME OUT FROM
YOUR POINT OF VIEW?
>> WELL, IT WAS VERY SCARY.
IT WAS A VERY, VERY SCARY
SESSION FOR US.
PERSONALLY AND FOR THE FAMILIES
THAT I WORK WITH.
ULTIMATELY --
>> SCARY BECAUSE YOU THOUGHT THE
FUNDING WAS GOING TO BE TAKEN
AWAY?
>> WE WERE PUT IN A POSITION
WHERE WE HAD TO GO AD VTH NOT
ONCE, BUT TWICE TO GET OUR
SERVICES PUT BACK IN THE BUDGET.
FIRST DURING THE SPECIAL SESSION
TO HAVE THE FUNDED FOUND AND
PLACED BACK IN THE BUDGET AND
THEN IT WAS IN HOUSE BILL 1 AND
TAKEN OUT.
>> IN THE END, HOW DID IT TURN
OUT?
>> THE WAIVER SERVICES WERE
COVERED BUT MANY OTHER SERVICES
FOR DISABILITY SERVICES WEREN'T.
>> KAREN, THE LESSON FOR YOU
GOING FORWARD, WHAT WOULD YOU
LIKE TO SEE DIFFERENTLY IN THE
FUTURE?
THERE ARE ALL THESE PRIORITIES.
>> WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE
HAPPEN IS HAVE REFORM SO WE
AREN'T PITTING SERVICES AGAINST
EACH OTHER.
THAT WOULD BE THE IDEA IN THE
SAME RESPONSE.
WHEN IT COMES DOWN TO IT -- I
APPRECIATE WHAT SOME OF THE
OTHER PANELISTS SAID.
THEY UNDERSTOOD ABOUT "TOPS" AND
THE SITUATION WE WERE IN, OUR
CHILDREN, MANY OF OUR
CHILDREN -- NOT ALL OF THEM, BUT
SOME OF THEM -- COULD DIE
WITHOUT THE SERVICES THEY HAVE
AND THERE WERE MANY PARENTS PUT
IN THAT SITUATION.
>> DIANE, YOU WANTED TO JUMP IN?
>> I THINK WHAT I'M HEARING IS
THAT SPENDING IS NOT THE
PROBLEM.
THAT WE HAVE THINGS THAT ARE
NECESSARY AND PRIORITIES SO FOR
ME, PERSONALLY, I HAVE A SON
THAT'S GOT "TOPS."
WE'LL BE LOSING THAT.
I HAVE A FAMILY WHO HAS A
PERSONAL CARE ATTENDANT AROUND
THE CLOCK, THAT'S GOING TO BE
LOOKED AT BEING CUT.
MY HUSBAND WORKS FOR THE STATE
DEPARTMENT AND HE NOW WORKS FIVE
JOBS FOR FIVE PEOPLE THAT HAVE
BEEN LAID OFF.
>> HE'S TAKING THE
RESPONSIBILITY OF FIVE PEOPLE?
>> BECAUSE THEY HAVE BEEN -- ON
TOP OF ALL THAT, I WAS ASKED,
WELL, WOULD YOU ADD A PENNY TO
SALES TAX AT THE SAME TIME AS MY
AIR CONDITIONER WENT OUT SO I
SPENT THAT PENNY RIGHT AWAY.
SO, WHAT'S FRUSTRATING TO ME IS
WE ALL TALK ABOUT HOW, OKAY,
I'LL GIVE UP "TOPS."
I'LL GIVE UP THE FUNDING FOR MY
FAMILY MEMBER THAT NEEDS THAT
ROUND THE CLOCK CARE AND I'LL
PAY THAT PENNY.
IT'S IMPACTING ME IN A VERY
POWERFUL WAY AND I'M STRETCHED
TO THE LIMIT NOW.
BUT, ARE WE TALKING ABOUT, SO,
HOW DO WE GET REVENUE?
WE NEED TO TALK ABOUT HOW WE GET
REVENUE BECAUSE THESE PRARTS ARE
TOO IMPORTANT TO BE --
>> THANK YOU FOR SHARING YOUR
SITUATION.
THAT'S ALL THE TIME WE HAVE THIS
PORTION OF OUR SHOW.
WHEN WE RETURN, WE'LL BE JOINED
BY OUR PANEL TO EXPLORE "REGULAR
AND EXTRAORDINARY: LEGISLATIVE
REVIEW"
>>> WELCOME BACK TO "LOUISIANA
PUBLIC SQUARE."
TONIGHT, WE'RE REVIEWING THE
LEGISLATURE'S RECENTLY-CONCLUDED
"REGULAR AND EXTRAORDINARY:
LEGISLATIVE REVIEW."
JOINING US NOW IS SENATOR ERIC
LAFLEUR, WHO IS THE CHAIR OF THE
FINANCE COMMITTEE.
HE'S A DEMOCRAT FROM LAPLACE.
MELINDA DESLATTE, SHE GRADUATED
FROM LSU.
DR. JIM RICHARDSON.
HE MAY KNOW THAN ANYONE ELSE
ABOUT THE DEFISHANYS IN THE
STATE'S REVENUE STRUCTURE.
HE SERVED ON THE COMMITTEE THAT
ESTIMATES HOW MUCH THE STATE CAN
SPEND EACH YEAR.
MALINDA WHITE, A DEMOCRAT FROM
BOGALUSA.
SHE'S NEW TO THE CAPITOL.
WELL, WE'VE REACHED OUT TO
SEVERAL PROMINENT REPUBLICAN
LAWMAKERS AND ALL OF THEM HAD
PRIOR COMMITMENTS.
BEFORE WE GO TO OUR AUDIENCE,
I'D LIKE TO ASK ALL OF YOU TO
ADDRESS A QUESTION.
YOU KNOW, WE ENTERED THIS FIRST
SPECIAL SESSION IN A SERIOUS
FISCAL CRISIS.
NOW WE'RE DONE.
ARE WE OUT OF THE CRISIS?
AND, WHAT WERE THE BIG SUCCESSES
OR FAILURE GOING THROUGH THESE
LAST FEW MONTHS?
WE'RE GOING TO START WITH YOU,
SENATOR LAFLEUR.
>> OUR FAILURE WAS THE INABILITY
TO FULLY FUND "TOPS" OR THE
UNWILLINGNESS OF THE LEGISLATURE
TO FULLY FUND "TOPS," WHICH I
THINK IS A VERY IMPORTANT
PROGRAM.
THE GOVERNOR MADE THE
APPROPRIATE PROPOSALS BUT THE
LEGISLATURE CHOSE NOT TO FUND
IT.
THEN THERE'S A WHOLE BUNCH OF
OTHERS IN THE COURSE OF
GOVERNMENT THAT WILL LOSE A FEW
DOLLARS.
THE HH, DEPARTMENT OF
CORRECTIONS.
>> YOU'RE ON THE SENATE SIDE, DO
YOU THINK THE SENATE WOULD HAVE
FULLY FUNDED "TOPS."
>> YES, I FEEL COMFORTABLE ABOUT
THAT.
>> I WANT TO STIR UP
CONTROVERSY.
[LAUGHTER]
>> THE SUCCESSES AND FAILURES,
I'LL LEAVE TO OTHER FOLKS TO
DISCUSS.
IN TERMS OF WHETHER OR NOT
THINGS ARE SETTLED AND WE'RE IN
A BALANCED BUDGET SITUATION, I
WOULD SAY THAT EVERYONE'S IN A
BALANCED BUDGET SITUATION NOW.
LEGISLATURES DON'T SEEM TO KNOW
WHAT THEY'VE PASSED IN TERMS OF
THE MONEY THAT THEY'LL GENERATE
AND WILL PAY FOR THINGS.
THERE IS A POTENTIAL BUDGET
DEFICIT FOR THE FISCAL YEAR THAT
JUST ENDED.
IT IS AN OVERASSUMPTION TO
SUGGEST EVERYTHING IS FINE AND
DANDY.
>> YOU CAN BEEN COVERING
LEGISLATIVE SESSIONS FOR MANY
YEARS.
HOW WOULD YOU RATE THIS ONE?
>> LONG.
[LAUGHTER]
19 WEEKS IN A ROW OF THREE
SESSIONS IS MORE THAN ANYBODY
SHOULD BE ASKED TO DO, REPORTER
OF LEGISLATURE OR MEMBER OF THE
PUBLIC WATCHING IT.
>> DR RICHARDSON, YOU PROBABLY
ONE OF THE BEST WELL-KNOWN
ECONOMIST AT LSU.
HOW DID YOU VIEW WHAT HAPPENED
IN THE LAST SIX MONTHS?
>> A COUPLE OF THINGS I WILL SAY
THEY DID WELL, TRYING TO
REINCORPORATE THE INCOME TAX
BASE.
I THINK THEY DID A VERY NICE
THING.
ON THE BROADER PICTURE OF THE
OVERALL BUDGET, WE ARE STILL
VERY CLOUDY ABOUT IF WE REALLY
SOLVED THE BUDGET PROBLEM.
WE DID NOT DO IT FOR THE
LONG-TERM.
EVEN IN THE SHORT-TERM, MANY OF
THE TAX CHANGES, THE NUMBERS
THAT ARE BEING USED TO PROJETH,
VERY, VERY SHAKY, VERY SOFT AND
UNSURE OF OURSELVES ABOUT HOW
MUCH MONEY WE WILL GET IN THE
END.
YOU HAVE THE ONGOING ECONOMY,
WHICH IS DRAGGING A LITTLE BIT
BECAUSE THE ENERGY SECTOR, NOT
DOING NEARLY AS WELL AS IT ONCE
WAS.
TO A CERTAIN EXTENT, I THINK FOR
THIS FISCAL YEAR WE JUST ENDED,
WILL BE A T SURELY
DEFICIT OF FUNDS.
I WILL NOT BE SURPRISED IF WE
HAD TO BRING ANOTHER SESSION IN
EARLY JANUARY.
>> THAT'S A SOBERING THOUGHTS.
THINGS HAVE GOTTEN WORSE BEFORE
THEY'VE GOTTEN BETTER.
I APPRECIATE THAT
DR. RICHARDSON.
ABO
HOW ABOUT YOU?
>> WELL, AS A FRESHMAN
LEGISLATURE, I WENT INTO THIS
PROCESS AS A STUDENT OF THE
PROCESS.
THE THING THAT I FOUND MOST GOOD
FOR ME IN THE BEGINNING WAS TO
BE ABLE TO ATTEND WAYS AND MEANS
AND APPROPRIATIONS AND WATCH
BILLS GET VETTED OUT AND
UNDERSTAND THE IMPACTS TO SO
MANY PEOPLE AND THAT HELPED ME
UNDERSTAND, WHEN WE WENT INTO IT
AND I JUST WANTED TO DIVE IN AND
HELP, I WASN'T SENT HERE TO SIT
ON THE SIDELINES AND I RAN A
CAMPAIGN ON NOT KICKING THE CAN
DOWN THE ROAD.
I IMMEDIATELY STEPPED IN WITH
WHAT THINGS THAT I KNEW ABOUT,
SUCH AS VENDOR COMPENSATION FEES
AND THINGS LIKE THAT, THAT I
COULD DELIVER ON AND IT WAS A
SPENDING CUT.
THE PROCESS, THOUGH, AFTER THREE
SESSIONS, I DEFINITELY FEEL LIKE
I'M NO LONGER A FRESHMAN.
[LAUGHTER]
>> I DON'T THINK ANYBODY'S A
FRESHMAN ANYMORE AFTER GOING
THROUGH ALL OF THAT.
HOW DARE YOU, AS A LEGISLATURE,
TRY TO CAPITALIZE ON THINGS YOU
KNOW ABOUT.
[LAUGHTER]
>> HE CREATED AN ORGANIZATION TO
REVAMP THE FISCAL AREA OF THE
STATE.
DAVID. TO GO TO
YOU HAD A QUESTION ABOUT ALL THE
XEMPTIONS AND CREDITS ANDú|
WHATNOT THAT INTERFERE WITH OUR
REVENUE PICTURE.
>> I APPRECIATE IT.
JUST SPEAKING AS AN INDIVIDUAL
TAXPAYER, I WAS CONCERNED ABOUT
SOME OF THE -- YOU KNOW, SOME OF
THE THINGS THAT WERE PROPOSED.
AND, I, LIKE MANY PEOPLE -- I'M
ABLE TO, YOU KNOW, TAKE
ADVANTAGE OF THINGS, MORTGAGE
INTEREST WRITE-OFF AND THINGS
LIKE THAT.
I THINK THE ELIMINATION OR THE
DECREASING OF THOSE TAX -- OF
THOSE CREDITS WHEN I DO MY TAXES
AND ALL THE OTHER PEOPLE IN THE
STATE, PERSONALLY, I GUESS I
THINK IT'S KIND OF A BAD IDEA.
IT HURTS THE MIDDLE CLASS PEOPLE
AND I THINK IT HURTS ALMOST ALL
HOMEOWNERS, ANYONE THAT'S GOT A
MORTGAGE.
AND I WAS JUST A LITTLE BIT
CURIOUS IF THEY'RE STILL GOING
TO BEAT THAT DRUM?
IF THE GOVERNOR IS GOING TO
STILL BE BEATING THE DRUM NEXT
YEAR?
>> PARTICULAR PERSONAL OR
INDIVIDUAL INCOME TAXES?
>> DEDUCTIONS THAT YOU GET FROM
YOUR --
>> HOW OUR LEGISLATURES WANT TO
REACT TO THAT?
>> THE ONE THE GOVERNOR PROPOSED
WOULD HAVE EXCLUDED THAT
WRITE-OFF SO YOU STILL ENJOY
THAT WRITE-OFF, EVEN WITH THE
GOVERNOR'S WRITE-OFF.
>> CHARITABLE DONATIONS AND
THINGS LIKE THAT.
>> REPRESENTATIVE WHITE?
>> I ACTUALLY CARRIED THAT BILL,
ROB SHADOIN CARRIED IT IN THE
FIRST ROUND AND WHEN IT FAILED,
I WITH HAD A BILL THE SAME.
AND WORKED TO MAKE THAT BILL
SOMETHING THAT WOULD ACTUALLY
BRING ABOUT TAX REFORM IN A GOOD
WAY.
AND SO BASICALLY, JUST IN GIST,
IT WAS ONE THAT DID NOT ALLOW TO
ALL TAX DEDUCTIONS WITH THE
EXEMPTION OF STATE INCOME TAX
AND SALES AND USE TAX.
THAT WAS IT.
AND, THIS IMPACT THAT WE TALKED
ABOUT FOR SOMEONE MAKING
$100,000 A YEAR, IT WOULD HAVE
COST THEM $200.
IF YOU ARE MAKING $1 MILLION, IT
WOULD HAVE BEEN AROUND $2,500.
IN LIEU OF THE SERVICES IT WOULD
HAVE COVERED, IT WOULD HAVE BEEN
TREMENDOUS AND BROUGHT IN $88
MILLION CORRECTLY FROM THESE TAX
DEDUCTION EXEMPTIONS.
IT WOULD NOT HAVE AFFECTED YOUR
MORTGAGE INTEREST, YOUR
CHARITABLE CONTRIBUTIONS.
>> YOU MAY GET ANOTHER CHANCE?
YOU MAY GET ANOTHER CHANCE TO
TALK ABOUT THAT NEXT YEAR.
FREDERICK, YOU HAD A QUESTION
ABOUT A TOPIC THAT EVERYONE
GROWNED AND SIGHED ABOUT WHEN WE
BROUGHT IT UP EARLIER, "TOPS."
>> I'M A RECENT HIGH SCHOOL
GRADUATE.
I GRADUATED THIS PAST MAY AND
"TOPS" IS ON EVERY HIGH SCHOOL
SENIOR'S MIND.
IT WAS ON MY MIND DEFINITELY.
WHAT WE WANT TO KNOW IS, IS
THERE A PLAN IN PLACE -- THE
QUESTION IS DIRECTED MORE TOWARD
TO LEGISLATURES.
IS THERE A PLAN IN PLACE TO
FULLY FUND "TOPS" IN SUBSEQUENT
YEARS AND AT THE PROMISE THAT
WAS MADE TO STUDENTS --
>> THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION.
WE'RE GOING TO LET THE
LEGISLATURES ANSWER IT.
WHY DON'T YOU TELL US WHAT
HAPPENED TO "TOPS."
>> WELL, THEY DIDN'T FULLY FUND
IT.
WHAT THEY DID, THIS TIME, IS --
FIRST OF ALL, THEY PASSED A LAW
THAT CAPS THE SPENDING ON "TOPS"
SO THAT IT DOESN'T NECESSARILY
GROW AS THE COST OF TUITION
GROWS.
IF LSU WANTED TO RAISE ITS
TUITION, THE LEGISLATURE DOESN'T
HAVE TO INCREASE THE PAYMENTS
FROM "TOPS" TO MATCH THE TUITION
COST.
SETTING THAT ASIDE FOR FUTURE
YEARS, THEY DIDN'T IMMEDIATELY
PAY FOR THE FULL PROGRAM NOW SO
STUDENTS WILL FACE A CUT FOR THE
AWARD IN THE UPCOMING SCHOOL
YEAR.
SMALL CUT IN THE FALL AND A
BIGGER CUT IN THE SPRING.
AND TO YOUR QUESTION, I DON'T
THINK THERE WAS ANYTHING THAT
SUGGESTS THERE WAS A SUSTAINABLE
PLAN FOR THE LONG-TERM TO
CONTINUE TO FUNDING "TOPS" AND
TO MAKE SURE THAT EVERYBODY WHO
IS ELIGIBLE ACTUALLY RECEIVES
THE FUNDING.
>> HOW ABOUT OUR LEGISLATURES,
DO YOU AGREE?
>> THE CURRENT REVENUE MEASURE
IN PLACE WON'T FUND MOST
ANYTHING.
IF WOULD BE A CATASTROPHE IF WE
DON'T PICK SOMETHING ELSE OR
RENEW WHAT'S IN PLACE.
THE LEGISLATURE REJECTED IT.
>> DO YOU HAVE CHILDREN IN
COLLEGE?
>> I HAVE CHILDREN IN COLLEGE
FROM 2004, THREE CHILDREN,
STARTING IN 2004 AND JUST
GRADUATING IN 2016, THIS YEAR.
>> WERE THEY "TOPS" STUDENTS?
>> THEY WERE "TOPS" STUDENTS.
UNDERSTOOD THAT COMPLETELY.
WHAT I DIDN'T UNDERSTAND IS HOW
THE FUNDING WORKED UNTIL I GOT
HERE.
I LISTENED TO A GENTLEMAN
EXPLAIN TO ME HOW HIGHER
EDUCATION HAD BEEN CUT BY 70%,
WHICH DROVE THEIR COST UP.
WHILE THEY COST WAS BEING DRIVEN
UP, I WATCH MY CHILDREN -- FROM
ONE TO THE OTHER, THEIR "TOPS"
GO UP SO REALLY, BASICALLY,
WE'RE SHIFTING TAX DOLLARS FROM
ONE TO THE OTHER TO COMPENSATE
FOR THE RISING COST AND REALLY
THE BURDEN WAS CARRIED ON THE
BACKS OF THE PARENTS AND
STUDENTS.
>> A LOT OF THAT SHIFTING FOR
BURD
BURDEN, ESPECIALLY FOR REVENUE,
THE BUSINESS COMMUNITY THINKS
THEY'RE TAKING MORE FROM US THAN
INDIVIDUALS.
MONIQUE, YOU'RE WITH THE
[INDISCERNIBLE] CHAMBER, IS THAT
CORRECT?
>> [INDISCERNIBLE]
>> YOU HAD YOUR HANDS FULL.
[LAUGHTER]
>> IT WAS A VERY LONG SESSION
AND I LEARNED A LOT.
[INDISCERNIBLE] AND SEVERAL
[INDISCERNIBLE] AND OUR
INVESTORS ARE CONCERNED ABOUT
THE ANTI-BUSINESS SETMENT THAT
[INDISCERNIBLE] THE LEGISLATURE
THIS YEAR.
WE'RE CONCERNED ABOUT THE
ECONOMIC POSTURE OF OUR STATE.
THERE ARE LARGE INDUSTRY THAT
HAVE BUSINESS EXPANSION PLANS
AND WE WERE ON THE TABLE TO BE
CONSIDERED FOR THOSE EXPANSIONS.
WHAT DO YOU PROPOSE WILL BE THE
FUND SO THAT THE
FRONT OF THE BUDGET SHORTFALL
DOESN'T FALL TO BUSINESS?
>> I'D LIKE DR. RICHARDSON TO
TRY TO ADDRESS THIS BALANCE WITH
BUSINESS AND INDIVIDUALS.
>> WELL, IF YOU GO BACK AND JUST
SEE WHAT WE DID, WE FIRST
STARTED REALLY RAISING TAXES TO
MEET SHORTFALLS IN OUR BUDGET IN
2015.
AND ALMOST ALL OF THOSE TAX
INCREASES, THOUGH THEY WERE NOT
CALLED TAX INCREASES, THAT'S
WHAT THEY WERE, WERE REALLY
FOCUSED ON BUSINESS.
ON CUTTING BACK CREDITS.
CUTTING BACK EXEMPTIONS.
FOCUS.S KIND OF THE
AND THAT -- WHEN IT GOT INTO THE
NEW YEAR IN 2016 AND A NEW
GOVERNOR AND THEY NEEDED MONEY
IN A HURRY, THEY THEN WENT TO
THE SALES TAX, WHICH IS MORE
INDIVIDUAL ORIENTED, BUT ALSO
BUSINESSES PAY THAT, TOO.
IT'S JUST NOT INDIVIDUALS.
THEN THEY ALSO DID SOME MORE
CUTTING ON THE TAX CREDITS, AS
WELL.
SOME MORE HAIRCUTS, I THINK,
THEY CALLED THEM.
THAT'S WHERE THEY COULD GET
MONEY.
ALSO, EVEN IF YOU LISTEN TO BOTH
SIDES, THE DEMOCRATS AND THE
REPUBLICANS, THE GENERAL FAVOR
WAS, WELL, BUSINESS IS GOING TO
PAY ITS SHARE.
THAT'S KIND OF THE FOCUS.
I THINK AS WE THINK ABOUT
REDUING THE TAX STRUCTURE, YOU
TAXTHE MAKE S
STRUCTURE, ONE, IT GENERATES THE
REVENUE THE STATE THINGS IT
NEEDS TO SPEND ON IMPORTANT
PROGRAMS, WHICH COULD BE FROM
EDUCATION TO HEALTHCARE TO
PRISONS TO HIGHWAYS.
NUMBER TWO, IT ALSO HAS TO BE --
I SAY BUSINESS-FRIENDLY.
IT CANNOT BE SO ANTI-COMPETITIVE
OR ANTI-BUSINESS THAT YOU MAKE
PEOPLE THINK ABOUT WHERE THEY
WANT TO INVEST.
AS WE GO ALONG THERE, I THINK
THE GOVERNOR, THE LEGISLATURES,
THEY'RE VERY AWARE OF THAT
DELICATE BALANCE.
DO THEY ALWAYS COME UP WITH
ANSWERS?
NO, NOT NECESSARILY.
BUT I THINK IT WILL BE A DRIVING
POINT AS WE GO ABOUT REFORMING
THE TAX CODE OVER THE NEXT
SEVERAL YEARS, YES.
>> REPRESENT FROM
[INDISCERNIBLE], JAY, THINKS IT
IS A VERY INTERESTING BALANCE,
INDEED.
DO YOU WANT TO FOLLOW-UP WITH A
QUESTION WITH THAT?
>> I WOULD.
GIVEN THE FACT THAT THIS PAST
SEVERAL SESSIONS, WE HAD TAX
INCREASES.
WE HAD CREDIT CURTAILMENT AND
SOME OTHER PAYMENTS THAT WERE
EITHER ELIMINATED OR SHORTFALL
LIKE VENDORS COMP.
WE KNOW THAT WAS ALL A BRIDGE TO
GET TO TRUE REFORM.
WE HAVE A [INDISCERNIBLE] ABOUT
DR. RICHARDSON.
WE HAVE A TASK FORCE DEALING
WITH INVENTORY TAX AND SALES TAX
STREAMLINING AND MODERNIZATION
AND ALL OF THESE REPORTS ARE
GOING TO COALESCE CLOSER TO THE
2017.
DO YOU SEE AN APPETITE TO DO
TRUE REFORM, WHICH INCLUDES
CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS, WHICH
INCLUDES STATUTORY REFORMS AND
DEDICATIONS, CONSTITUTIONAL
DEDICATIONS?
SOME THINGS THAT WILL BE
DIFFICULT TO DO, BUT IT WILL
TAKE WILL TO DO IT.
DO YOU SEE THAT WILL?
>> IT IS THE QUESTION OF THE
HOUR.
I'LL ASK BOTH OUR LEGISLATURES
TO ADDRESS THAT.
>> I THINK THE WILL IS THERE.
ONE THING ABOUT TAXES IS WHO IS
GOING TO PAY THEM IS LIKE THIS
GENTLEMAN POINTED OUT, HE
DOESN'T WANT TO GIVE UP HIS
EXEMPTIONS.
THEY DON'T WANT TO GIVE UP THEIR
"TOPS."
WE ARE SELF-INTERESTED IN HOW WE
DO AND THAT'S THE PROBLEM THAT
LEGISLATURES HAVE TO DEAL WITH.
THEY COME TO THE CAPITOL AND
SAY, MY BUSINESS CAN'T MAKE IT.
IT WILL BE DESTROYED WITHOUT THE
CREDITS THEY GET.
IT GOES ON AND ON.
AT THE END OF THE DAY, TO COME
UP WITH A FAIR SYSTEM.
I'M HOPING THAT THE LEGISLATURE
WILL AND UP WITH IT BECAUSE IF
WE DON'T, WE WILL -- IF THEY
DON'T COME UP WITH ANY REFORM,
THE ONLY THING WE'LL BE FORCED
TO DO IS RENEW IT.
WE HAVE THE HIGHEST TAXES IN THE
COUNTRY, IN A STATE WITH MORE
THAN A FAIR SHARE OF PEOPLE WITH
POVERTY.
AS YOU POINTED OUT, YOU'RE
WORRIED ABOUT YOUR CONSTITUENT
BASE.
AT THE END OF THE DAY, WHATEVER
SYSTEM WE COME UP WITH HAS TO BE
FAIR AND THAT'LL BE --
>> WE WELL OVER $1 BILLION IN
NEW REVENUE AND THROUGH
EXEMPTIONS AND WHATNOT THAT WERE
CANCELED, THAT TWO YEARS FROM
NOW, ARE GOING TO GO AWAY.
SO IS THAT, REPRESENTATIVE
WHITE, GOING TO BE AN
ENCOURAGEMENT OR SENATE TO DO
REAL REFORM?
>> I PERSONALLY BELIEVE THAT IS
THE INCENTIVE.
I THINK THERE WILL BE MANY
CONVERSATIONS AND DIALOGUES
BETWEEN LEGISLATURES, THE
GOVERNOR AND BUSINESS AND
INDUSTRY, THAT WE WILL HOPEFULLY
BE ABLE TO WORK OUT SOMETHING
THAT IS CONSIDERED FAIR AND BE
ABLE TO CONTINUE TO GROW THE
ECONOMY IN LOUISIANA WITHOUT
HURTING IT SO MUCH.
IT MEANS JOBS, OPPORTUNITIES FOR
ALL OF US.
AND, AS A BUSINESSPERSON, I
COMPLETELY UNDERSTAND THAT.
IT'S GOING TO BE SOMETHING --
IT'S GOING TO BE A CHALLENGE TO
FIND THAT BALANCE.
I DON'T THINK WE HAVE ANY CHOICE
IN THAT MATTER AND THE MORE WE
COME TO THE TABLE TOGETHER TO
FIGURE THAT OUT, THE BETTER OFF
THAT WE WILL ALL BE AND LESS OF
AN IMPACT ON ANY ONE PARTICULAR
SECTOR.
>> AUSTIN, ONE OF OUR STUDENTS,
HAD A QUESTION ABOUT ONE OF THE
BIG TICKET ITEMS IN THE
EXEMPTION AREA.
AUSTIN, WHY DON'T YOU ASK THEM
ABOUT IT?
>> [INDISCERNIBLE] WHAT'S GOING
ON WITH THE FILM TAX CREDIT.
[LAUGHTER]
MY QUESTION IS DIRECTED TOWARD
THE LEGISLATURES.
SO, ESSENTIALLY, THE
[INDISCERNIBLE] WAS $180
MILLION, THAT WOULD BE DEDICATED
TO IT FOR THIS YEAR.
SPEAKING FROM A BUSINESS
STANDPOINT OR FROM THE IDEA OF
FAIRNESS, HOW DOES THAT OR WILL
THAT EFFECT BUSINESS NEGATIVELY
OR POSITIVELY BEING THAT IT IS
CAPPED AND THERE'S NO MORE MONEY
THAT CAN BE SPENT ON.
>> EVERY TIME YOU GIVE SOMEONE A
CREDIT, YOU HAVE TO LOOK, DO
THEY BRING ANYTHING EXTRA TO THE
TABLE, OTHER THAN LOBBYIST TO
BATON ROUGE THAT CRY ABOUT IT.
IF YOU LOOK AT WHAT OTHER STOKES
SOUTHERN STATES ARE DOING, IT'S
TOO GENEROUS.
I DON'T THINK IT'S WORTH THE
CREDIT WE HAND OUT.
>> DR. RICHARDSON, DO YOU HAVE A
VIEW ON THE FILM TAX CREDIT?
>> IF YOU LOOK AT ALL THE
STUDIES THAT HAVE BEEN DONE, YOU
FIND WHAT ERIC SAID IS CORRECT
AND THAT IS IN THE SENSE OF THE
DOLLARS THAT WE PAY OUT IN THE
CREDIT ARE SUBSTANTIALLY MORE
THAN WE GET BACK.
SO IN THE COST RATIO, THE STATE
DOES NOT WIN.
THERE'S NO DOUBT ON THE OTHER
HAND, IF YOU LOOK AT SOMETHING
SOMETHING -- A CREDIT CREATES
ACTIVITY AND INTEREST.
IT DOES NOT BRING BACK THE
DOLLARS.
>> HAS HOLLYWOOD SOUTH GONE
SOUTH?
>> I THINK WE STILL HAVE
ACTIVITIES GOING ON BUT IT'S
VERY COMPETITIVE.
WITHIN ALL THE STATES TO TRY TO
LURE THAT FILM INDUSTRY TO THEM.
HOWEVER, I THINK THAT WHAT WE'RE
SEARCHING FOR RIGHT NOW IS A
TRUE AUDIT PROCESS SO THAT WE DO
SEE A GOOD RETURN ON INVESTMENT
AND REALLY LOOK AT THAT AND
ANYTHING TO DO WITH TAX CREDITS.
ARE WE EMPLOYING THE PEOPLE WE
SAY WE WERE WHEN WE WERE GETTING
THE TAX CREDITS TO BEGIN WITH?
I THINK THAT A REAL TRUE FOCUS
ON THAT WILL TELL THE TALE.
>> I THINK SOMEONE SPOKE
ABOUT -- I THINK --
SELF-INTERESTED, WHICH IS
ENTIRELY THE CASE.
I'M A STATE WORKER.
I HAVE AN OLDER BROTHER WITH
SPINAL DI
SPINAL BIFFDUH.
I KNOW HIGHER EDUCATION HAS BEEN
RAISED AT A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT.
MY QUESTION WILL BE TO CHAIRMAN
LAFLEUR, AFTER THIS SESSION, ARE
YOU MORE CONFIDENT OR LESS
CONFIDENT IN THE LONG-TERM
HEALTH FINANCIALLY OF THIS
STATE?
>> I MEAN, MY CONCERN IS THAT
THE VOTES THAT WE TOOK, AT THIS
POINT, WERE ALL TEMPORARY IN
NATURE AND FAIRLY EASY TO MAKE
BECAUSE THEY WERE ONLY TEMPORARY
AND IT WAS ONLY A FIX TO GET US
TO THE FOLLOWING YEAR.
THE NEXT VOTES, IF THEY'RE GOING
TO BE STRUCTURAL CHANGES, THE
KIND THAT THE COMMISSION WILL
PRESENT, I GUESS WE'LL PICK FROM
THEIR MENU OF ITEMS.
I HOPE THE GUYS I SERVE WITH AND
THE WOMEN I SERVE WITH HAVE THE
POLITICAL WILL TO PUT THE STATE
ON A TRACK WHERE WE SEE EVERY
YEAR REGULAR REVENUE, NOT
NECESSARILY INCREASING AN
EXTRAORDINARY RATE, BUT AN
APPROPRIATE RATE TO SUSTAIN
GOVERNMENT AND THE BASIC
SERVICES WE PROVIDE SO HAVE KIDS
IN HIGH SCHOOL HAVE PLANNED OUT
FOUR YEARS GET WHAT THEY WORKED
FOR.
SO WE NEED SOMETHING THAT'S
LONG-TERM AND RELIABLE AND
THAT'S PART OF THE REASON WHY I
THINK DR. RICHARDSON WOULD AGREE
THAT THE CREDIT AGENCIES ARE
LOOKING AT US AS DOWNGRADING AND
WE'VE BEEN ON WATCH BECAUSE THEY
LOOK AT US AS A FISCAL HOUSE.
>> THAT'S NOT IN ORDER.
>> THE SENATORS AND THE
REPRESENTATIVES WILL HAVE A
TREMENDOUSLY TOUGH JOB.
IT'S MORE THAN THEM.
IT'S THE PEOPLE IN THE STATE.
MANY OF THE THINGS WE HAVE TO
CHANGE ARE CONSSTUGZAL SO WE'RE
GOING TO ASK THE REPRESENTATIVES
AND THE SENATORS TO GIVE YOU AN
OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK YOUR MIND
ABOUT WHAT WE SHOULD DO AND AS A
COMMUNITY, ARE WE PREPARED TO
VOTE FOR SOME OF THESE THINGS?
ANY TIME YOU SUGGEST A CHANGE IN
THE TAX, THERE ARE GOING TO BE
CERTAIN PEOPLE WHO LIKE IT,
PERSONALLY.
AND CERTAIN PEOPLE WHO MIGHT NOT
LIKE IT QUITE AS MUCH.
THERE'S NO WAY TO GET AROUND
THAT.
THAT'S WHY WE HAVE TO MAKE SURE
WHEN WE DO IT, THAT WE AREN'T
AIMING AT ANY ONE SECTOR OF THE
ECONOMY OR ANY ONE GROUP OF
PEOPLE OR TRYING TO MAKE IT JUST
AS FAIR AS POSSIBLE
HORIZONTALLY, ACROSS PEOPLE WITH
THE SAME INCOME OR VERTICALLY,
PEOPLE WITH DIFFERENT INCOMES
AND THAT'S HARD TO DO AND PEOPLE
HAVE DIFFERENT IDEAS OF WHAT'S
GOOD.
IT'S GOING TO BE A CHOICE OF THE
PEOPLE, AS WELL, IT'S A CHOICE
OF OUR LEGISLATURES.
>> DR. RICHARDSON, YOU TOUCHED
ON SOMETHING THAT KELLY HAS A
BIG GLOBAL QUESTION ABOUT.
>> MY INTEREST, OF COURSE, YOU
KNOW, SELFISH HERE, IT'S FOR
SPECIAL NEEDS COMMUNITY.
WE'RE -- AND I DO UNDERSTAND AND
REALLY SYMPATHIZE WITH EVERYONE.
I WAS A BENEFICIARY OF "TOPS," I
GOT PAID $800 A SEMESTER FOR
GOING TO SCHOOL.
I GET IT, IT'S NEEDED.
IT'S NECESSARY.
BUT THE PEOPLE I WORK WITH --
WE'RE NOT ASKING TO GO TO
COLLEGE, WE'RE ASKING FOR THEM
TO BE ABLE TO BREATHE.
WE'RE ASKING FOR THEM TO MAYBE
BE ABLE TO EAT LIKE YOU AND I
CAN EAT, LIKE YOU AND I CAN SIT
HERE AND TALK.
WE'RE ASKING FOR HELP TO GET
THEM TO THAT POINT.
IS THERE ANY POSSIBILITY OF A
CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION TO
SECURE FUNDS FOR THE WAIVER
SERVICES OR EXPAND THE BUDGET
FOR THE WAIVER SERVICES TO
INCLUDE PEOPLE WHO HAVE BEEN ON
THE WAITING LIST FOR 10-PLUS
YEAR.
>> THERE'S A LOT OF PEOPLE
AREN'T GETTING THE SUPPORT.
>> THOUSANDS THAT NEED -- THAT
ARE SITTING HERE DYING, WAITING.
>> AS FAR AS THE CONSTITUTION
THERE'S A LOT OF DEDICATED
FUNDING OUT THERE THAT WE CAN'T
TOUCH.
I THINK THAT SOMETIMES IT GETS
OFF-BALANCE.
THE WAY I SEE IT, YOU CAN PUT
YOUR MONIES ASIDE FOR SOMETHING
AND THEN SOMETHING ELSE BREAKS
LOOSE.
IT'S THE SAME WAY IN THE STATE.
DEDICATE NT TOp?
FUNDING, IN MY OPINION, BECAUSE
OF THAT.
AND WE'VE SEEN IT.
HOWEVER, I COMPLETELY UNDERSTAND
THE NEED FOR THOSE WAVERS.
I, TOO, HAVE A DOWN SYNDROME
UNCLE.
ALL ME KNOWS IS LOVE.
AND HE WOULD LIKE TO REMAIN
INDEPENDENT IN HIS HOME AND HIS
MOTHER, MY GRANDMOTHER'S 94
YEARS OLD WITH AN AMPUTATED LEG.
I GET IT AND I UNDERSTAND IT AND
I'VE SEEN IT AND THE FUNDING IS
VERY CRITICAL AND IMPORTANT.
THEY ARE ALL CITIZENS OF THIS
STATE AND MANY OF THEM -- THEIR
PARENTS AND THE CAREGIVERS HAVE
PAID THEIR DUES TO RECEIVE THAT
TYPE OF SERVICE SO I UNDERSTAND
AND I COMPLETELY GET IT AND WORK
VERY, VERY HARD IN TRYING TO GET
THE FUNDS FOR IT.
>> YOU'VE BEEN WATCHING THE
LEGISLATURE IN ACTION FOR SO
MANY YEARS AND THERE'S ALL TYPES
OF LOBBYIST THAT COME.
THIS IS A PARTICULARLY DIFFERENT
KIND OF LOBBYING GROUP AND
WHAT'S YOUR PERCEPTION OF HOW
IMPACTFUL THEY ARE?
AND EXPLAIN TO OTHERS WHAT IT'S
LIKE EVERY YEAR WHEN THEY COME
IN, IN FAVOR OF THE WAIVERS?
>> WHAT YOU HAVE EVERY YEAR
DURING THE APPROPRIATIONS AND
SENATE FINANCE PROCESS, YOU SEE
A LOT OF FAMILY MEMBERS WITH
PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES WHO
SHOW UP IN YELLOW SHIRTS.
YOU WILL SEE THEM PACK COMMITTEE
ROOMS.
THIS ROOM, YOU SAW DIFFERENT
KINDS OF SHIRTS BECAUSE SO MANY
PEOPLE WERE FACING BUDGET CUTS.
THEY WILL BUTTON HOLE
LEGISLATURES.
I'M SURE SENATOR LAFLEUR HAS HAD
THAT HAPPEN AND WHITE.
THEY SPEND A LOT OF TIME
ADVOCATING FOR DISABILITIES
SERVICES.
YOU HAVE SEEN, IN THESE THREE
SESSIONS, YOU HAD FOLKS WHO
SHOWED UP IN EVERY TAX COMMITTEE
HEARING TO PITCH THAT MONEY WAS
NEEDED TO BE RAISED TO HELP THEM
COVER THEIR SERVICES.
ALSO, YOU JUST -- THE TESTIMONY
IS SO EMOTIONAL AND PEOPLE HAVE
SUCH PERSONAL AND REAL STORIES
AND PARTICULARLY IN SENATOR
LAFLEUR'S PLACE, THERE WERE
PEOPLE CRYING LISTENING TO THE
TESTIMONY OF THE PARENTS AND
SIBLINGS AND GROWN UPS WHO CAN'T
SPEAK FOR THEMSELVES IN SOME
INSTANCES AND NEED HELP FROM THE
STATE IN SOME FASHION.
IT WAS IMPACTFUL IN THE LEVEL OF
THE WAIVER PROGRAMS AND THEY
DIDN'T GET CUT.
THEY WERE REALLY THREATENED WITH
CUTS FOR QUITE A LONG TIME.
SO IT CLEARLY MADE A DIFFERENCE
TO SEE THOSE PEOPLE HERE EVERY
YEAR.
BUT IT IS JUST KIND OF A
COMMENTARY ON THE
[INDISCERNIBLE] OF THE LOUISIANA
BUDGET PROCESS FROM YEAR TO
YEAR.
THESE FOLKS IN THESE YELLOW
SHIRTS ARE SO WELL-KNOWN BECAUSE
UP YEAR AFTER
YEAR AFTER YEAR BECAUSE THEIR
SERVICES ARE NEVER PROTECTED.
>> SENATOR LAFLEUR, HAVE WE SEEN
MORE LOBBYISTS OVER THE YEARS?
>> YOU'LL SEE MORE LOBBYISTS
NEXT YEAR.
EVERYBODY IS GOING TO BE
AFFECTED BY ANY TAX WE'RE GOING
TO BRING, SOMEBODY'S GOING TO BE
THERE TO.
>> EVERY TAX, EVERY EXEMPTION,
EVERY CREDIT.
>> THE PROBLEM WITH TAXES,
POLITICIANS, THEY'RE ALSO
RATIONAL THINKERS, TOO, AND THEY
LIKE TO TAKE THE PATH OF LEAST
RESISTANCE.
YOU HAVE TO TAKE DIFFICULT VOTES
THEY REQUIRE YOU TO DO MORE.
YOU HAVE TO GO TO EVERY CHAMBER
MEETING, ROTARY CLUB MEETING SO
YOU CAN EXPLAIN THE RATIONALE
BEHIND THAT VOTE YOU CAN GET THE
SUPPORT.
IT REQUIRES A LOT, A LOT OF WORK
BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO ENGAGE THE
PUBLIC.
YOU HAVE TO LET THEM KNOW WHAT
YOU'RE DOING AND WHY YOU'RE
DOING IT.
SO IF YOU ARE -- THE GUYS WITH
THE YELLOW SHIRTS, YOU DON'T
KNOW WHO THOSE PEOPLE ARE UNLESS
YOU HAPPEN TO HAVE A CHILD
[INDISCERNIBLE] DISABLED FOR
SOME REASON AND REQUIRES THIS
EXTRA ATTENTION.
ONCE THAT GETS TO THE
LEGISLATURES, THEY TEND TO THINK
DIFFERENTLY.
IT'S THE SAME THING WITH TAXES.
YOU HAVE TO MAKE PEOPLE THINK
DIFFERENTLY ON WHAT YOU'RE
VOTING ON BECAUSE THEY THINK OF
IT AS TAX AND DON'T UNDERSTAND
THE RATIONALE.
POLITICIANS WHO ARE TRYING TO
MAKE A DIFFERENCE WILL GO HOME
AND TRY TO EXPLAIN THEMSELVES
AND RATIONALE AND FIND THE
SUPPORT.
>> OUR MOST RATIONAL
REPRESENTATIVE ON THIS PANEL,
REPRESENTATIVE WHITE, WHAT DO
YOU THINK?
>> THAT'S WHAT I WITNESSED THIS
YEAR.
IT TAKES A LOT OF COURAGE TO
MAKE THE HARD DECISIONS.
IT'S ALSO SELF-IMPOSED.
I THINK A LOT OF PEOPLE FEEL
THAT AS A POLITICIAN, THAT THIS
DOESN'T IMPACT YOU AS WELL
FINANCIALLY AND IT DOES, AS A
BUSINESS OWNER, IT DOES.
YET AT THE SAME TIME, YOU HAVE
TO REALIZE THAT YOU WANT AND
NEED THESE SERVICES AND THEY
MUST BE FUNDED AND THEN YOU HEAR
ABOUT FRAUD AND FRAUDULENT --
FRIVOLOUS SPENDING AND THINGS
LIKE THAT AND YET WE STILL HAVE
TO WORK HARD AT FOLLOWING THAT
AND MAKING SURE THAT WE ARE
WEEDING OUT THOSE THINGS.
THAT DOESN'T HAPPEN OVERNIGHT.
THE WORKINGS OF CONARTISTS ARE
NOT SO EASILY UNRAVELED.
THE COURAGE THAT IT TAKES TO DO
THAT IS SOMETHING THAT I WAS
VERY SURPRISED BY THIS YEAR.
I WILL SAY, GO ON RECORD IN
SAYING THAT I WAS ELECTED TO
SERVE THESE FOUR YEARS.
I'VE BEEN CALLED A FOOL NOT TO
LOOK AT REELECTION.
I FEEL LIKE IF WE PULL TOGETHER
INDEPENDENTLY AND UNITE IN WHAT
WE DO AND WE CAN REALLY FIX THE
PROBLEMS OF LOUISIANA AND BRING
US UP TO THE LEVEL THAT WE'RE
NOT AT THE BOTTOM OF ALL STATE
RECORDS OF COMPARISONS, THEN I
BELIEVE THAT WE DON'T HAVE TO
WORRY ABOUT OUR SUNSET DATES.
I BELIEVE WE WILL BE RE-ELECTED
AND DO THINGS THAT ARE RIGHT FOR
THE PEOPLE AS A WHOLE.
THAT'S HOW I FEEL ABOUT IT AS A
FRESHMAN AND I PRAY I CONTINUE
TO LEAD THAT WAY.
>> YOU'RE STILL ENCOURAGING AND
I LIKE TO HEAR THAT.
ONE OF OUR STUDENTS, TAYLOR, HAD
A QUESTION ABOUT VALUES AND HOW
YOU MAKE DECISIONS.
TAYLOR?
>> HI.
I WAS WONDERING WHICH ITEMS WERE
PUT AT PRIORITY WHEN DECIDING
WHAT MONEY GOES WHERE WITH THE
BUDGET THIS YEAR?
>> I CAN ANSWER THAT FOR MYSELF.
I HAVE A PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP IN
MY DISTRICT AND A RURAL HOSPITAL
AND THAT IS IT.
SO WHEN IT CAME TO THE DECISION
BETWEEN FUNDING "TOPS" FULLY AND
FUNDING THE HOSPITALS, I WILL
TELL YOU THE EXAMPLE I USE MANY,
MANY TIMES.
IF ANY LEGISLATURE CAME THROUGH
MY AREA OR ANYONE CAME UP ON A
CAR ACCIDENT WITH A YOUNG PERSON
INVOLVED, YOU WOULD NOT THROW
$1,000 BILL AT THAT STUDENT AND
SAY, GOOD LUCK AT COLLEGE.
YOU WOULD GET THEM TO THE
HOSPITAL.
IF IT WAS -- THEY HAVE TAKEN
LOSSES IN THE PAST.
THEY WOULD MEANT AN HOUR, TWO
AND A HALF HOURS DEPENDING ON IF
YOU'RE INSURED OR NOT.
IT WAS A MATTER OF LIFE OVER
DEATH FOR ME.
I TAKE EDUCATION VERY HIGHLY AND
SUPPORT OF IT, WE HAVE TO
DELIVER OUR BABIES AND KEEP THEM
HEALTHY TO GET TO COLLEGE SO TOP
PRIORITY WAS OUR HOSPITALS.
>> TAYLOR, THAT'S A GREAT
QUESTION.
APPRECIATE IT.
THE GENTLEMAN NEXT TO YOU,
SCOTT, IS A REGULAR FOR
SUPPORTING SCHOOLS AND
WELL-KNOWN TO SOME OF THE FOLKS
HERE.
SCOTT, YOU HAD A QUESTION.
>> AT THE END OF THE DAY, IT'S
ABOUT DECIDING NEEDS VERSUS
WANTS AND PRIORITIZING
OBLIGATIONS AND CERTAINLY THE
BEST INVESTMENT THE LEGISLATURE
CAN MAKE IS K-12 EDUCATION
SHOULD BE A PRIORITY AND
UNFORTUNATELY IT DIDN'T RECEIVE
THE SAME LEVEL OF FUNDING AS IT
HAS IN THE PREVIOUS YEAR.
BUT WE'RE HOPEFUL THAT THE
MECHANISMS IN PLACE WITH TASK
FORCE COMMUNITIES ON A NUMBER OF
VARIOUS TOPICS CAN BRING SOME
RATIONAL SOLUTIONS THAT WILL
BRING THE STAKEHOLDERS TO THE
TABLE AND THE RED AND BLUE AND
BASED ON THE LAST SEVERAL WEEKS
OF LEGISLATIVE SESSION CAN
DISSIPATE AND MORE RATIONAL
THOUGHT CAN COME TO THE TABLE.
WE WOULD HOPE TO SEE THE PUBLIC
EDUCATION AS A PRIORITY, AS LONG
AS SEVERAL OF THE OTHER TOPICS
MENTIONED HERE TODAY.
THE MAIN QUESTION, K-12
EDUCATORS AND PARENT WANT TO
KNOW IS WHY WASN'T K-12 FULLY
FUNDED OR MAINTAINED AT THE SAME
LEVEL FROM LAST YEAR.
>> HOW ABOUT SENATOR LAFLEUR?
>> IMPORTANT PART OF THE BUDGET,
IT EATS UP MORE MONEY THAN ANY
OTHER ITEM.
IT IS $3.6 BILLION.
THE CUTS IMPOSED WAS A SMALL
AMOUNT.
IT WAS LESS THAN 1/10 OF 1%.
IT WAS NOT THE DOLLARS THAT WERE
CUT, IT WAS THE SYMBOLISM BEHIND
US NOT FULLY FUNDING IT.
WHEN YOU TELL ANY SCHOOL BOARD
THAT WE CUT $40 MILLION OUT OF
K-12 EDUCATION, THAT'S A BIG
NUMBER.
IN THE BIG PICTURE, IT'S A SMALL
NUMBER.
SYMBOLICALLY, IT'S A
REPRESENTATIVE THAT OUR
PRIORITIES ARE NOT VERY HIGH.
>> THAT'S THE FIRST TIME WE'VE
SEEN THAT HAPPEN.
>> REBECCA, YOU'RE GOING TO GET
THE LAST QUESTION.
>> I THINK A LOT OF PEOPLE WOULD
BE WONDERING, MOVING FORWARD
WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT
STABILIZING THE BUDGET AND
REFORMS COMING NEXT YEAR, WHY
SHOULD PEOPLE BE OPTIMISTIC?
THERE'S BEEN A CLIFF EVERY YEAR
AND YOU HAD OPPORTUNITIES EVERY
YEAR.
>> WE [INDISCERNIBLE] AND THAT
BASICALLY SET US ON COURSE FOR
NON-RECURRING REVENUE WITH A
SMALL GROWTH EVERY YEAR.
THE FACT OF THE MATTER WAS, THE
REVENUE INCREASED IN TOO LARGE A
NUMBER, I DON'T THINK IT WAS ALL
ATTRIBUTABLE TO
[INDISCERNIBLE] --
>> AGAIN, OPTIMISM, I THINK,
REALISTICALLY, YES, THE
RESOLUTION THAT CREATED THE TASK
FORCE FOR STRUCTURAL REFORM WAS
OPTED BY A NUMBER OF PEOPLE,
REPUBLICANS AND DEMOCRATS AND
THEY ALL APPRECIATE THAT IT'S
GOING TO MAKE HARD DECISIONS
THAT THEY'LL HAVE TO MAKE.
NOW, WILL THEY -- WILL THEY BE
UP TO IT?
I THINK THEY'LL DOING THEIR VERY
BEST SO I'M OPTIMISTIC FROM THAT
PERSPECTI
PERSPECTIVE.
DO I THINK IT'S GOING TO BE
EASY?
NO, I DO NOT.
>> WE'VE RUN OUT OF TIME FOR OUR
QUESTION AND ANSWER PORTION.
WE'D LIKE TO THANK OUR PANELISTS
FOR YOUR INSIGHT ON THIS MONTH'S
TOPIC.
>>> WHEN WE COME BACK, WE'LL
HAVE A FEW CLOSING COMMENTS.
>>> ROBERT, WE GET DOWN TO NO
ONE REALLY WANTS TAXES,
DIFFICULT CHOICES COMING UP IN
THE FUTURE AND I GUESS, IT WAS
INTERESTING THAT [INDISCERNIBLE]
WAS PASSED BY THE PEOPLE OF
LOUISIANA AND TURNED OVER SO
QUICKLY.
WE HAD ADDITIONAL REVENUE
FOLLOWING ALL THE HURRICANES.
WE DON'T KNOW WHAT DISASTERS ARE
GOING TO BEFALL.
>> IT HAD A LONG-TERM IMPACT.
BUT NOW LOOK.
AFTER EVERYTHING THE
LEGISLATURES HAVE BEEN THROUGH,
THEY'RE OPTIMISTIC.
THEY KNOW IT'S TOUGH BUT THEY
WERE ENCOURAGING.
AT LEAST WE HAVE THAT GOING.
>> WE'RE LOOKING FORWARD TO
DR. RICHARDSON AND YOUR TASK
FORCE THAT YOU'RE ON, AS WELL.
>> COME UP WITH ANSWERS.
>>> THAT ALL THE TIME WE HAVE
FOR "LOUISIANA PUBLIC SQUARE."
WE ENCOURAGE YOU TO VISIT OUR
WEBSITE AT LPB.ORG/PUBLICSQUARE.
WHILE YOU'RE THERE, PLEASE
COMMENT ON TONIGHT'S SHOW.
WE'D LOVE TO HEAR FROM YOU.
>>> ON NEXT MONTH'S "LOUISIANA
PUBLIC SQUARE," WE'LL TALK ABOUT
THE UNREST SPARKED BY THE DEATH
OF ALTON STERLING.
HOW LAW ENFORCEMENT INTERACTS
WITH MINORITIES.
TUNE IN ON AUGUST 15.
>>> GOOD NIGHT, EVERYONE.
>>> FOR A COPY OF THIS PROGRAM,
CALL 1-800LIFE 973-7246 OR GO TO
WWW.LPB.ORG.
>>> SUPPORT FOR THIS PROGRAM IS
PROVIDED BY THE FOUNDATION FOR
EXCELLENCE AND THE LOUISIANA
PUBLIC BROADCASTING AND FROM
VIEWERS LIKE YOU.