Jindal to Louisiana: Drop Dead
Would-be President Bobby Jindal has rejected $100 million in Federal unemployment assistance to Louisiana. Using classic Rethug logic, he argues that accepting the aid now could lead to an increased tax on business down the road. Of course, this is demonstrably untrue. From the article:
“Today, however, Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal announced his intention to oppose changing state law to allow his Lousiana citizens to qualify for the second two unemployment provisions. Jindal said the state would only be accepting money to increase the unemployment insurance payments for those who currently qualify for unemployment insurance.
In all, Jindal turned away nearly $100 million in federal aid for his state’s unemployed residents. Further, as the National Employment Law Project projected on Febuary 13, EUC extension alone would have benefited 24,981 Louisiana residents. Jindal justified his decision by claiming that expanding unemployment benefits would result in tax increases for businesses. In a press release, the governor’s office explained:
The Governor said the state will not use a portion of the stimulus package that requires the state to change its law to expand unemployment insurance (UI) coverage to qualify for up to $32.8 million of the federal stimulus funding because it ultimately would result in a tax increase on Louisiana businesses.
But it is not clear why participating in the expanded unemployment insurance program would result in tax increases for business. By Jindal’s own estimate, the recovery package would have funded his state’s unemployment expansion for three years, at which point the state could — if it chose to do so — phase out the program.”
El Somnambulo would like to point out that, anyone who knows anything about state government understands that legislation can be enacted with a sunset provision, one that either has a set termination date on the legislation, or that requires subsequent approval by the legislature to remain in effect past a certain date. Nothing in the stimulus package would have prevented Louisiana from enacting this provision.
Jindal instead has chosen to buffer his standing with the right-wing wacko base of his party at the expense of over 25,000 desperate citizens of Louisiana.
No Mardi Gras beads for, you, Jindal!
Hey, Louisiana, show us your ass.
Louisiana is so last election to Jindal.
Watching Jindal and Palin try to out crazy each other for the next four years is going to be fun.
Nice boy Jindal is, but about as sharp as a sack of wet mice.
This doesn’t seem like a smart move to me. This is going to affect a lot of middle class Louisiana voters. Most of them are not hard-core Republicans and I think only hard-core Republicans will applaud this move. I read that Sanford in SC, Barbour in MS and Palin in AK are also thinking of doing this. Will the provision added by Clyburn affect this? Can the legislators get around their boneheaded governors regarding the unemployment insurance?
Still, I don’t get the logic – he won’t accept it because it could lead to higher taxes on businesses in 3 years? WTF? What about the people out of work RIGHT NOW?
they elected him, they deserve him
One thing to keep in mind about stimulus package funds is that there is a provision in the bill that lets state legislatures accept the funds, so there is likely quite abit of theater in all of this. Governors get their Absolut Wingnut on, while the legislatures take the money. You will know how principled these wingnuts are if 1) they actively work against their legislatures accepting the money or 2) they direct their agencies to not spend the money.
And the guy who took Dollar Bill Jefferson’s seat in LA is now subject to a recall petition for his votes against the package.
El Somnambulo would point out that 3 of the 4 governors who have publicly stated they may not take the money (Jindal, Sanford & Palin) are considering Presidential bids.
The fourth, Haley Barbour of Miss., got plenty of dollars to rebuild his state’s casinos and pricey beachfront properties almost right away from Bush while Louisiana was left to languish. It is no coincidence that he was both the RNC Chair and one of Washington’s biggest lobbyists (both at the same time) during the reign of Bush I.
Donhoni….we’ve elected a few boneheads here too…..some of them over and over and over. (You Boneheads and your Minions know who you are.)
Did we too, knowing ‘the machine’ did whatever was expedient, deserve these creeps? How about those who voted for their opponents.
A little charity here, please. Not for Jindal but for the poor, suffering populace.
Again you miss the point.
The change in Federal Law will require a change in state law to maintain the proposed changes by Obama. Governors are correct to be worried about enacting a structural change to the tax structure.
Unemployment taxes are indeed a real item of concern for Governors although given the drama of the stimulus bill there will be no unemployment according to Obama.
To say Lousiana was left to languish shows the total fiction of the liberal argument. The reality is $763 million in 2005 , all federal money went to La.
http://www.fema.gov/news/newsrelease.fema?id=18922
The only point that El Somnambulo misses is the Rethug talking point parroted by ‘Rebuild’.
To restate the point. By Jindal’s own admission, increased unemployment costs would be covered by the funding that Jindal is turning down for three years. Only after three years, and only unless the State Legislature did not incorporate a sunset provision in the required enabling legislation, would there be a possible increase in UI costs to business.
However, Repugs never let sound public policy interfere with political posturing, even if it means screwing 25,000 Louisianans in the process.
Actually, Matt Yglesias has a totally plausible (considering who these particular Rethugs are) theory as to why Jindal, Barbour, and Sanford are looking to turn down the $$’s:
“If Louisiana makes its unemployment benefits less generous than what’s available in other states, then maybe unemployed citizens will leave Louisiana for Texas and other neighboring states, thus creating an artificial appearance of an improved economic situation. It would be the equivalent of Mike Bloomberg fighting poverty by demolishing all the low-income housing in New York and hoping the poor people all move elsewhere.”
And as to FEMA $$’s, how has the rebuilding of New Orleans, the building of safe levees and the repatriation of N’Awlins residents from Texas, etc., progressed? Whenever the Bushites and their apologists talk about how Dubya kept the nation safe after 9/11, they never mention that Bush presided over the destruction of a great American city and never followed through on his pledge to rebuild it.
I hope that legislative override gets plenty of play in LA; because that demon-believing charlatan might get his sorry ass recalled before ’12! The more LA voters know that Jindal thinks he’s in a win-win political situation and is ultimately playing a game, the more resentful they will be.
Out of tokens, the GOP might have to turn to Raygun’s corpse.
The sad truth is that zombie Reagan is smarter than the current GOP.
The key word is permanent. You know, like El Sonofamoron’s declining mental state. If Jindal accepts that money, they will have to make “permanent” changes to their laws. PERMANENT. That’s part of the deal. There is no sunset option, it’s in the stimulus package that it HAS TO BE a permanent change. For 3 years it will pay, but once that money is gone, someone is going to have to pickup for it every year. Guess who? Lousiana businesses. Case closed.
Incorrectamundo, ‘Libsaredumb’. BTW, how many brain cells did you kill coming up with that clever monicker?
From today’s New Orleans Times-Picayune:
“A senior aide to (Sen.) Landrieu agreed that the state would have to change the law to take advantage of the windfall but said the change would not have to be permanent. Instead, the Legislature could write the new law with a “sunset provision” so it expires when the federal stimulus dollars run out.”
Sayin’ it’s so don’t make it so.
Sayin’ it’s so don’t make it so.
Maybe not for you, but for them it is usually their only hope.
Given the lack of creativity with mashing of names and put-downs, I truly believe I’m responding to a 12 year old!
Must be since Libsaredumb has the reading comp skills to match a tween, since there are two UI packages and one which MAY become permanent can be modified by the legislature to have it expire once the Fed cash runs out. Either way, most states will have to change its UI laws.
So, yes, a sunset clause may be added, there is an out, but it doesn’t jive with the clever’s desired outcome so he/she/it makes up crap such as “HAS TO BE”.
Toss off. I’m sure you’re old enough to do that to completion now, right?
BTW – El Som,
A Gerald Ford Reference here on DL? We are ensmartening the masses. Aren’t we.
Only 25,000 in the whole State of Louisana would be eligible? The number seems awfully low considering all those people still out of work in New Orleans and surrounding communities. Where did that figure come from? Jindal wants to be president with this logic? Still dont get how he thinks business would be taxed if he accepted the money, how does that compute?
Reply to Jason: Either ‘ensmartening the masses’ or smartasses. Or both.