Louis R. Avallone

Category: 2014

  • Good grief, Charlie Brown! It’s about Christ.

    Good grief, Charlie Brown! It’s about Christ.

    By Louis R. Avallone

    –

    In December 1965, nearly 15 million viewers, or one-half of the television viewing audience, tuned in to watch A Charlie Brown Christmas. It has become the longest-running cartoon special in history, but it almost was cancelled before it ever was aired. You see, the CBS network executives were less than impressed. Aside from the technical criticisms, resulting from a rushed production schedule, the executives did not want to have Linus reciting the story of the birth of Christ from the Gospel of Luke. It was thought that viewers would not want to be preached upon by an animated cartoon, especially from Biblical passages. Obviously, after almost fifty years of airing every Christmas, receiving an Emmy and a Peabody award, those CBS executives got it wrong.

    “There will always be an audience for innocence in this country”, said Charlie Brown’s creator, Charles Schulz. Nonetheless, the religious celebration of Christmas continues to face trivialization by an increasingly vocal and secular strain of society today.

    Retailers have tried calling Christmas trees, “holiday” or “family” trees. They’ve pressed-on with “Happy Holidays”, even though 67% of Americans prefer the greeting, “Merry Christmas”. Advertisers have pushed out “Christ” from Christmas and pushed on with “X-Mas.”

    Last year an activist group spent big bucks to purchase a billboard advertisement in New York City’s Times Square – a 40’ by 40’ image that asks, “Who needs Christ?” and answers that question with “Nobody”. In 2012, there was another Times Square billboard that urged viewers to, “Keep the Merry. Dump the Myth,” with an image of Christ beneath a photo of Santa Claus.

    Now, this year, there’s another anti-Christmas billboard campaign, but it’s moving from Times Square and is spreading into cities like Memphis, Milwaukee, St. Louis and Fort Smith. This year’s billboard uses an image of a child scribbling out a letter to Santa Claus saying, “All I want for Christmas is to skip church! I’m too old for fairy tales.”

    Goodness gracious. What is it about Christmas that is so offensive?

    Well, you see, it’s not Christmas at all – it’s Christ that’s the issue. While many might deny the existence of God, it’s much more difficult to deny Jesus, for whom we have historical evidence of his existence, even from secular sources that are outside of the Bible. Still, the life of Jesus is so powerful, and his words so meaningful, that even atheists cannot seem to get Him out of their minds. They must find it helpful to mock the religious beliefs of Christians everywhere with their billboards, even as they encourage non-Christians to do the same.

    So, what effect is this having in our country, or even around the world? Well, last year, reported cases of Christians killed for their faith around the world doubled from 2012. The number of people in America who believe in God has dropped almost 10% since 2009. In our public schools, there is increasingly no room for recognition of any faith whatsoever, Christianity or otherwise. And there’s even a case right now before the New Jersey Supreme Court to decide if the words “under God” should be removed from the Pledge of Allegiance because it discriminates against atheists.

    Even while it is true that 96% of Americans celebrate Christmas, only 51% consider it a “religious” holiday – and that number is declining. That means that the odds are pretty good, that when you are out Christmas shopping, the person ahead of you in line, or the person behind you, probably doesn’t consider Christ’s birth as the significant “reason for the season”.

    They may not realize either that buying more and more expensive gifts or all that “stuff” we buy at Christmas doesn’t mean we “care” more about our family or friends, especially when the teachings of Christ can show that love so much more than buying another gizmo, or gadget. In fact, the person in line with you may not know the life of Christ very well at all, or his teachings of tolerance, and respect for one another and the goodness of life. Or of gratitude, and humility.

    So, while Charlie Brown first asked the question in 1965 on national television, “Isn’t there anyone, who knows what Christmas is all about?!”, the answer has been the same for over 2000 years – it’s Christ. And we ought to put that up on a billboard too.

     

    Merry Christmas and Happy New Year!

     

     

  • Democrats and Denial – Not Just a River in Egypt

    Democrats and Denial – Not Just a River in Egypt

    Psychologists call it “confirmation bias”, which is the tendency to search for, or otherwise interpret information in a way that confirms what you already believe, regardless of the facts. You may call it “rationalizing”. Others may call it “missing the forest for the trees”. I call it “denial”, and as the old saying goes, denial is not just a river in Egypt.

    You see, almost 50% of Americans say the mid-term election results were a vote against the President’s policies. And almost every poll shows it too. At least 3 out of 4 of Americans believe the country is headed in the wrong direction, not to mention that the President’s approval rating with the American people – and within the black community, as well – is at the lowest level of his presidency. In fact, black voter participation this year increased from the last midterm election, and yet Democrats now hold less elected offices, at both the federal and state level, than at any time since the 1920s.

    Considering that the Obama administration has lost control of both the House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate, Democrats are turning to a familiar, but worn out explanation: It’s not the President’s policies being rejected by the voters. It’s that white people don’t like having a black man in the White House.

    Really? Yes, really. And be prepared to hear a lot of that in the next couple of years whenever Republicans stand in the way of the President’s agenda or oppose his executive orders, from immigration to gun control.

    Nevermind that it was white voters, in a largely white nation, who elected a black man to its highest office in the land. In fact, it was Iowa – which is 95% white – that made him into a contender for 2008. Still, he stirs the pot by telling reporters earlier this year that, “There’s no doubt that there’s some folks who just really dislike me because they don’t like the idea of a black president.”

    Seriously? Nevermind that folks might not really like the idea that their President told them, “If you like your health care plan, you can keep your healthcare plan,” while, almost 100,000 Louisianans have had their health insurance policies cancelled this year. Nevermind that you deliberately allowed American guns to make their way illegally into Mexico, where they were used by drug cartels to kill dozens – including a U.S. Border Patrol Agent. Nevermind that you promised Americans an administration filled with “transparency and the rule of law”, even though you issue executive order after executive order, thereby escaping the glare of the legislative process, the need to debate the issues, or to humbly ask for support from the 319 million Americans in this country.

    Race is just about the only song that the Democrats have left to sing now, but it will be completely out of key, though. You only need to look across the country to understand why. In Utah, they just elected young Republican Mia Love to the U.S. House of Representatives (she also happens to be black), and in South Carolina, Republican Tim Scott was elected as the first black U.S. Senator since reconstruction, and is the only black have also been elected to the U.S. House of Representatives.

    Then here at home, there’s State Senator Elbert Guillory from Opelousas. He also happens to be black, and he switched to the Republican Party, after years of seeing the continued plight of blacks in America, who traditionally vote Democrat every time, without any measurable improvement to their communities. Or how about Rev. C.L. Bryant, former NAACP leader and host of America on the Edge radio show here in Shreveport, who says that there is no reason for blacks or Latinos to support this president, when you look at the economic numbers.

    And he’s right. Since 2008, black poverty is up, and unemployment is down. 40% of black males are incarcerated, and 72% of black children are still being born to unmarried mothers. There are fewer blacks participating in the labor force and the unemployment rate among blacks is more than double than it is in among whites.

    This is, in part, why black Republicans are being elected to so many statehouses, city halls, and to Congress. People are voting for these black Republican candidates because of what they believe, not because of the color of their skin. Go ahead Democrats, sing the race song, but the rest of America is humming a different tune these days.

    Mary Landrieu, and Democrats everywhere, can rationalize both hers and the President’s diminishing popularity with the voters by saying that “(t)he South has not always been the friendliest place for African-Americans,” but the truth of the matter is that the South is no longer the friendliest place for empty suit politicians that leave any communities – black, white, or otherwise – with little more than empty hands.

    Democrats have paddled minority communities up this river of denial one too many times. And the problem now for Democrats, more than ever before, is that an increasing number of folks in these communities are simply tired of being taken for a ride.

  • There’s No Wizard In Oz

    There’s No Wizard In Oz

    By Louis R. Avallone
    –
    The Shreveport Mayor’s race has been wrought with lots of hand wringing, anxiety, and foretelling of the doom and gloom that awaits this great city, if only the voters happen to choose this candidate over another. Many express great concern about the continuation of the backroom deals that have plagued our community – and the wealthy benefactors and power brokers who have made that possible. And while most voters want to elect a leader this time that actually knows the way, shows the way – and then gets out of our way – we must also realize this: There is no “wizard” in Oz to save us.

    There is no “magical” leader that will solve all of the daunting challenges of our fair city. Much like the Tin Man needed a heart, or the Lion needed courage, we also have some seemingly, insurmountable dilemmas: We are facing a diminishing tax base, while at the same time needing to finance $200 million in underfunded pension plans, $342 million in water and sewer improvement projects, plus an estimated $400 million of road repair projects that are needed to be done right now.

    If the people of Shreveport wish to pick themselves back up this election season, dust themselves off, and take the reins of a proud Shreveport which future generations will build upon, and that we can preserve for our children, it won’t be because we relied upon any one “magical” leader or “wizard” in City Hall as mayor.

    No, we will pick ourselves up because more and more concerned citizens stepped-up, and contributed their time and talent towards shaping our community. By becoming more informed about the issues. By recruiting, and supporting, more candidates for the city council and parish commission who are more interested in solving our problems, instead of theirs. By changing our political culture and saying, “enough already” with how it’s been done before.

    Is the Mayor’s office an important one? Absolutely. But to invest too much dependence on a single individual is half-baked to start with, because it oversimplifies the tasks at hand, and provides too many voters with an easy way to stop paying attention after the election, when the real governing begins.

    You see, voting is not a kitchen countertop rotisserie, where you can just “set it and forget it” on election day. This is because, as Ronald Reagan once remarked, “Governments have a tendency not to solve problems, only to rearrange them”.

    So to solve problems, we need the most talented, competent, and skillful people working in City Hall, not more laws or ordinances, or throwing money at issues, more backroom dealings, or appointing another committee or hiring another consultant to study our problems. This time around, for real change, we must change, because our leaders have only that power which we are willing to give up.

    Don’t get me wrong, there are some other valuable lessons from the movie, The Wizard of Oz. For example, don’t stand next to windows during tornados. When something knocks the “stuffings” out of you, just stuff it back in and move on. The grass isn’t always greener over the rainbow. When you think you are the most helpless, you still have an amazing ability to help yourself. And, of course, the biggest lesson, there is no place like home.

    Well, Shreveport is my home and there’s no other place like it for me. And like Dorothy with her ruby red shoes, we’ve always had the power to help ourselves and get off the proverbial “yellow brick” road, and get back home to the basics of honesty and accountability in government.

    The question this time around, since we know there’s no “wizard”, nor the next great city of the south at the end of the “yellow brick” road we’re on now, how long before the so-called “powers that be” in our city realize it’s been a dead end road for them too?

  • Tell Me Lies, Tell Me Sweet Little Lies

    Tell Me Lies, Tell Me Sweet Little Lies

    By Louis R. Avallone
    –
    You probably have heard the song, “Little Lies” by Fleetwood Mac. You know the one. It goes, “Tell me lies, tell me sweet little lies…” Well, there’s nothing sweet about this, and frankly, there’s almost nothing that makes me more angry.

    You see, in a recent radio interview with MSNBC host Al Sharpton, President Obama said it did not matter that Senate Democrats didn’t want him campaigning for them in their home states. He explained that those incumbent Senators, many whom are fighting for their political lives, “are all folks who vote with me” and “have supported my agenda in Congress”. We get it. You’re the President and folks need to go along to get along with you.

    But what he said next reveals such an utter disrespect for the truth that it represent one of the greatest threats to democracy everywhere, and an affront to every man and woman who has fought and died to preserve our liberty: He said he told these Senate Democrats running for re-election, “…you do what you need to do to win. I will be responsible for making sure our voters turn out.”

    That’s right, just say whatever you need to say to the voters to win, and I’ll be waiting here at home in Washington, where we can resume my agenda when you get back.

    In other words, it doesn’t matter that the latest polls consistently reflect that almost 3 out of every 4 of us believe that the country is headed in the wrong direction, or that Obama’s approval index is in negative territory.

    It doesn’t matter to Obama how much the American people disapprove of his agenda for America. He only needs the Senate Democrats to further that agenda along – and not you, or me, or the sanctity of truthfulness in democracy.

    But there was a time in our nation when elected officials subordinated their own partisan interests for the greater good of our national interests. There was also a time when there was shame for not following through on your promises, or respecting the will of your constituents. And when you didn’t, there was honor in accepting the consequences.

    These principles were, in large measure, what brought about President Nixon’s resignation in 1974, when both Republicans and Democrats agreed that he had crossed the line. In fact, it was the most prominent of conservative Republicans – not Democrats – who eventually convinced Nixon to resign. And this was after Nixon had been reelected by the largest margin in U.S. history.

    Today, however, doing “whatever you need to do to win” seems to be the moral compass of our politics, and it pays homage to the belief that the ends really do justify the means, even though this is the antithesis of what our founding fathers believed.

    Not sure? Remember Obama promised that, “If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor. If you like your health care plan, you can keep your health care plan.” Meanwhile, almost 100,000 Louisianans have had their health insurance policies cancelled this year.

    He told us that the “Fast and Furious” program was started under the preceding Bush administration, but it wasn’t. In fact, the Obama administration, in October 2009, deliberately allowed American guns to make their way illegally into Mexico, where they were used by drug cartels to kill dozens – including a U.S. Border Patrol Agent.

    Obama said there was, “Not even a smidgen of corruption,” when questioned about the IRS targeting political groups, such as the Tea Party. But now we know that wasn’t true, and that the IRS “did not follow the law”.

    We were told by Obama that the attack on our embassy in Benghazi was because of a “shadowy character” in our country who made an extremely offensive video directed at Mohammed and Islam that sparked a “spontaneous riot”, but we now know that wasn’t true either. In fact, the original CIA talking points were revised at least 12 different times by the White House, just to fit their narrative – instead of the truth.

    On Obama’s first day in office, he proclaimed to his staff and the press, “Transparency and the rule of law will be the touchstones of this presidency.” Well, you can see from these few examples, nothing could be farther from the truth.

    So while Mary Landrieu feigns disapproval of Obama, considering the 6-7 score she gave Obama during the Senate debate in Shreveport recently, she still votes 97% of the time with him, and his agenda for America – despite how 3 out of 4 of us feel about that.

    You see, widespread lying simply makes it hard for citizens to make the best choices in the voting machines. And if our culture embraces a “do whatever you need to do to win” philosophy, then voting becomes a sham, and our democracy only an illusion.

    But if the future of our nation is a choice between citizens voting on lies and those who care more about the “ends” than they do the “means”, then you’ll have to forgive me for getting up and leaving when the President starts singing, “Tell me lies, tell me sweet little lies…” just to get Senate Democrats elected. That’s a performance – and so out of tune with what we believe as Americans – I just can’t listen to it anymore.

  • Shreveport’s Mayor’s Race – Beef or Chicken?

    Shreveport’s Mayor’s Race – Beef or Chicken?

    By Louis R. Avallone
    –
    If you’re like most people in Shreveport, you have spent more time studying a restaurant menu, and deciding between the beef or chicken quesadillas, than you have deciding which candidate for mayor will get your vote at the polls next month. And considering Shreveport-Bossier is reported as the fastest shrinking metropolitan economy in the country, according to a recent study by the U.S. Conference of Mayors, maybe it’s time to put the chips and salsa aside and let’s lay this all out right now:

    There is a tough road ahead for Shreveport. We are facing a diminishing tax base, plus over $200 million in underfunded pension plans, plus nearly $342 million in water, streets, and sewer improvement projects (in part to satisfy a consent decree with the Environmental Protection Agency and the Department of Justice), plus a convention center that is generating zero net revenue for the city, while costing taxpayers $5,479 per day to keep the doors open, not to mention the $400 million of road repair projects that are needed to be done right now.

    And considering that campaign contributions to the mayoral candidates – around $350,000 combined thus far – works out to be only $1.78 per capita in Shreveport, most voters are clearly not interested enough in this race, and will likely NOT vote next month, all despite their dissatisfaction with city government, amidst a growing sense of “Why bother?” or “What difference will it make, anyway?”

    Obviously, it makes a big difference, especially with the impending challenges faces our community. That’s why voters must go to the polls next month, confident they are electing a mayor that is qualified to lead the city and every city departments within it.

    A mayor that is willing to face the music, even if they don’t like the tune. A mayor that will hire the most talented department managers our city can afford – managers that will not only know the way, but will show the way, as well.

    Martin Luther King, Jr. once said that, “The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort, but where he stands at times of challenge and controversy”. This is why the next mayor must lead, not by pointing his or her finger, but moving their feet.

    And it’s not the most politically connected or polished candidates that make the best mayors. Ask cities like Detroit, which is $18 billion in debt from years of mismanagement, or closer to home, in New Orleans, where Ray Nagin left the city with over $25 million in debt as he exited, having spent $90 million per year more than the city took in annually.

    You see, to elect the right mayor, and the most qualified for the tasks at hand, voters have to find out about the candidates, gather materials about the candidates, evaluate their stands on the issues, learn about their leadership abilities, and learn how other people view the candidate. This is a lot of work, especially when you’re a single mother, or working 2 jobs, running to pick-up from football practice, helping children with homework in the evenings, or caring for elderly parents.

    Much worse than not having time, though, is having a small number of voters in Shreveport substitute their will for yours, and manage your family’s economic future, because they went to vote, and you didn’t. They studied the issues, and you didn’t. Property taxes, water, sewer, garbage, traffic patterns, sales taxes, economic development – the next mayor will profoundly impact all of these areas – and our community’s quality of life, as well.

    You see, the more of us who vote, the less likely we are to have a poorly managed city, yet so many ignore the consequences. Abraham Lincoln perhaps said it best: “Elections belong to the people. It’s their decision. If they decide to turn their back on the fire and burn their behinds, then they will just have to sit on their blisters.”

    So, should you end up studying a restaurant menu longer than you do the candidates for mayor this year, you have to ask yourself just one question: Am I happy with the state of our city today, and if not, how different would it be today, if I had known more about the candidates, back then?

    Now, if you’ll get our waiter’s attention – I think we’re ready to order.

  • Legislature Says NO to Raising Taxes in New Orleans

    Legislature Says NO to Raising Taxes in New Orleans

    By Louis R. Avallone
    –
    Should Caddo/Bossier Follow Suit?

    It’s a popular business adage that you have to spend money to make money. The question for taxpayers on November 4 is how much money, and whose money are you spending?

    You see, there’s an initiative on the ballot in November that will increase the sales tax on hotel guests in Caddo/Bossier by 2%, making the total occupancy tax 6.5% (and among the highest in the state). If passed, this means for every $100 in hotel bills, paid by guests to our area, $6.50 will be collected from them in taxes.

    The added 2% will generate an estimated $3 million in dedicated revenue for the Independence Bowl Foundation, as well as the Shreveport-Bossier Sports Commission and the Ark-La-Tex Regional Air Service Alliance. These organizations are composed of hundreds of volunteers and supporters who give their time, and considerable talent, to promote our communities, and improve our quality of life, not only for today, but as a legacy for the next generation.

    They are a big reason that the Independence Bowl is the largest sporting event in the state of Louisiana outside of New Orleans and LSU home football games. And that it’s the 11th oldest bowl in our country, and that it is being televised for the 23rd year in a row on ESPN. So, with their share of the almost $1 million in recurring annual revenue expected from the proposed tax, the Independence Bowl Foundation says that it can attract even better teams to the bowl, and preserve the bowl for years and years to come.

    Indeed, the Independence Bowl has pioneered sports tourism for our region, opening the doors to events like the Bassmaster Classic last year – which generated an estimated $7 million for the local economy. The Shreveport-Bossier Sports Commission says it can attract even more of these quality sporting events with its $750,000 share in taxes that it is expected to receive each year, if voters say “yes” next month.

    And, of course, if you are going to invite folks from all over the country for such events, you surely have to make an easy path for them to get here. But with our region’s current air service, that’s not always convenient, or affordable. Maybe that is why over 50% of all travelers flying from the Ark-La-Tex do so from anywhere else but Shreveport Regional. This is why the non-profit organization, Ark-La-Tex Regional Air Service Alliance, says it needs their expected $1 million share of the annual revenue provided by the proposed tax. They say that if they could get just one (1) new route, with a 50-seat regional airliner, it could make as much as a $4 million impact each year.

    Yes, objectives of these organizations are honorable, no doubt, and deserve our support and attention. We have to be careful, though, when folks start saying that such support, through an additional 2% hotel tax, will be at “no cost to the citizens of Caddo and Bossier parishes” or that it will be paid entirely by “out-of-town visitors”.

    That’s just not necessarily true – it affects our entire economy. In fact, for this very reason, Louisiana legislators just recently voted down Mayor Mitch Landrieu’s efforts to raise the New Orleans’ hotel-motel occupancy tax by another 1.75%. If they had raised the tax, New Orleans would have been on the same level as New York City, which has the highest hotel-motel taxes in the country. And according to Lieutenant Governor Jay Dardenne, he says doing that would have made it difficult to position ourselves as a “destination”, or even to attract events like the Superbowl, back to Louisiana.

    The proposed tax in Caddo/Bossier could mean that folks will stay fewer nights in our community, or hoteliers will offer less services, in an effort to compete with hotels in surrounding parishes, where the taxes are lower. After all, taxes can literally “move” people.

    Consider the meteoric population growth of Bossier Parish, and the stagnating population growth in Caddo Parish, over the past 20 years. Is it just a coincidence that Caddo Parish also has the highest property taxes in the state? Probably not. Or look at the number folks migrating from Louisiana to states with no state income taxes whatsoever. Again, coincidence? Probably not.

    You see, supporting this tax increase in November may be worthy of voter support, but it should never be because we can persuade enough people that “somebody else will pay the bill”.

    After all, we cannot tax ourselves into prosperity. If we could, we would have reduced the nation’s unemployment rate, paid down the federal debt, decreased the poverty rate, lowered healthcare costs, and increased national security at our borders years and years (and billions of wasted tax dollars) ago.

    No, we have to be careful here, on this slippery slope of increasing taxes in our community, whether it’s an occupancy tax or any other, for that matter.

    As we go to the polls in November, we need to remember, as Ronald Reagan said, that we have some people around here “who have never met a tax they didn’t hike”.

    And to those folks, I’d just say, remember whose money you’re spending – and that folks vote with their feet too.

  • Mary, why don you ak right?

    Mary, why don you ak right?

    By Louis Avallone
    –
    Senator Mary Landrieu is reimbursing taxpayers several thousands of dollars that she took and spent for a charter flight to attend campaign events, including a fundraiser in Dallas. She has an estimated net worth between $894,018 and $2.6 million, with assets totaling $1.9 million to $3.1 million, according to her own disclosure forms, yet she doesn’t maintain as much as an apartment in this great state of Louisiana.

    She represents the Louisiana people in Congress, but no longer finds it necessary to live here herself – even her voter registration card lists her primary residence as Washington, D.C. Maybe it’s because, as she said in a recent interview, “I really can appreciate the life that we live on the Hill.”

    And she’s done a lot living on the Hill, indeed, with the citizens of Washington, D.C. She sponsored a bill allocating $2 million for District of Columbia schools, which are ranked 26th in the nation, while schools in Louisiana still remain ranked near the bottom – 49th in the nation. She’s an advocate for the District of Columbia, as she said in a speech recently, and she wants “to speak on their behalf”. No doubt this is why the mayor of Washington, D.C. has proudly called Landrieu “the Senator representing the District of Columbia until we become the 51st state of the United States.”

    Goodness gracious, Mary. What’s wrong with you? Or as our south Louisiana family might say, “Mary, why don you ak right?”

    The truth is that these Mary shenanigans represent the last vestiges of Louisiana populist politics that asks the question first (and last), “What’s in for me?”

    There’s lots of examples of this in our state’s history. Governor Huey P. Long, even while wildly protesting against the wealthy in the 1930s, and proposing to guarantee every family a basic annual income, was himself making plans to become that which he so publicly abhorred – being wealthy. As a result of Long’s allegedly questionable acquisition of mineral rights to state owned properties, concentrated in wetland areas along our coast, those mineral rights have generated nearly $1 billion in royalties for his family and associates – and continue to do so still today.

    Then there was Governor Edwin Edwards. He was a populist, and was elected 4 times as governor because of it. In the end, though, he was found guilty of racketeering charges and sentenced to ten years in prison. In that case, Edwards had asked the question, “What’s in it for me?” and received $845,000 from a contractor who wanted to do business with the state, while at the same time raising taxes on the people of Louisiana by almost $1 billion.

    Then there was populist U.S. Representative Bill Jefferson from New Orleans, who rose from poverty to then serve in Congress. He accepted $500,000 in bribes while in office, in exchange for his influence in Congress. He hid some of that money in his freezer, as you may recall, but was sentenced to 13 years in prison after everything had thawed out.

    Then there was New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin who recently was convicted on 20 of 21 counts of bribery, and is now serving 10 years in prison. Prosecutors explained that Nagin sold the mayor’s office, for personal gain, which included lavish trips and cash, even after Katrina, where he had ignored federal and state offers of help, and their recommendations to evacuate the city before the storm.

    All of these examples share a common denominator: These politicians all claimed to be champions of the people, and defender of the “little guy”. Instead, the people lived under one set of rules, while their elected leaders lived by another. They said one thing, and then did another.

    They may have had good intentions, but one only needs to look around to see what decades of politicians’ good intentions have done to our nation, and our communities. Intentions are powerful beginnings. They provide a spark to ignite a purpose, launch a plan, and to direct the mind, but they tell you nothing about the actual outcome.

    Huey Long made famous the slogan, “Every man a king, but no one wears a crown.” Sounds good, but history has shown it’s often the politicians who end up wearing the crowns. All politicians, to some degree, sound alike – and it’s becoming harder and harder to tell the difference.

    But at least they ought to live in the state that they are representing, so we can keep an eye on them, and figure it out for ourselves.

    Robert Frost wrote famously in a poem about how two roads diverged in the woods, and how he chose the one less traveled, and how “that has made all the difference”. For our state’s elected officials in Washington, shouldn’t they choose the road back home, as well?

     

  • Bull Riding and Voting

    Bull Riding and Voting

    By Louis Avallone
    –
    A bull rider has 8 seconds to achieve a qualified ride, starting from when the bull’s shoulder breaks out of the gate, and usually ending when the rider’s hand comes out of the rope or the rider hits the ground.

    Well, if you are voter in Caddo Parish this November, saddle up, because 8 seconds will be more time than most are given to make their selections in the voting machines – on a ballot that seemingly stretches from here to Hammond.

    The usual elected positions are listed on the ballot, of course, ranging from the U.S. Senate to mayor to city marshal to district judge and city judge, and to school board, city council, public service commissioner, and everything in between. On top of all of that, there are also fourteen (14) Louisiana Constitutional amendments to vote on, as well.

    Since Louisiana voters only have three (3) short minutes to cast their vote once they enter the voting machine, they must either be informed about their ballot selections ahead of time, or they will hastily vote blindly – and what good is having elections if the latter is the result? Voting blindly means simply that you are being bossed around by those who are not voting blindly. And who wants to be bossed around with their vote, anyways?

    Perhaps this is why many of our elected officials can disobey the will of the people, and yet are re-elected to disobey them again and again. Bad choices in those voting machines can result in cities that become bankrupt, or in parishes with higher and higher property taxes, or in needless economic policies that increase our nation’s debt, and in foreign policies that weaken our national security.

    If you are going to vote blindly, just stay at home. If that doesn’t appeal to you, then let’s spend the next two (2) months getting educated on the candidates, and the issues.

    Depending in which districts you live, there are almost twenty-five (25) ballot items, and with only three (3) minutes to select all of them, you’ll have to make a selection every seven (7) seconds in that voting machine before it will be time for you to go.

    And if you haven’t read the fourteen (14) constitutional amendments ahead of time, you’ll never make it in three (3) minutes. There are 626 words describing those amendments on the ballot. And since the average adult reads 300 words-per-minute, that will leave most folks with less than 60 seconds, to make the remaining selections for all of the other elected offices listed on the ballot.

    Many say that a long ballot is one of the reasons that most eligible voters don’t vote at all. Voter turnout is continuing to worsen for the United States (42%). Even the Canadians have a higher voter turnout for their elections (60%) than we do, and we are the role model for democracy around the world.

    But if government is to be brought within the will of people, in an age of declining voter turnout, and low-information voters, then the ballot must be sufficiently short to allow the will of people to be exercised, or we must do our homework before going into the voting machine.

    Some folks might resent the allegation that they vote blindly. But ask many of them whom they voted for in the lieutenant governor’s race in the last election, or in the secretary of state’s race, or the race for state insurance commissioner. How about who they voted for as their parish commissioner or school board member?

    The bottom line, long ballot or short one, we must study the speeches of our candidates for public office, consider the arguments for and against them, and then know why we are supporting or opposing them, in the first place – before we go to vote.

    I’m not a professional bull rider, of course, but less than 8 seconds just isn’t long enough for anyone in a voting machine, particularly when there are so many important items on the ballot to consider.

    Depending on the election results in November, though, bull riding could be an attractive profession for many. I’m sure there is less “bull-you-know-what” being a bull rider than dealing with more government bureaucracy in our lives – any day of the we

  • Original Ideas

    Original Ideas

    By Louis Avallone
    –
    The trouble with too many elected officials is that there is no idea too stupid for them to subsidize with your money. After all, these bureaucrats have more of your money than they do any original ideas of their own. In fact, many of them would not recognize an original idea if it bit them on the butt.
    [br]
    Instead of leading, our elected officials prefer to be more chameleon-like, and simply be what others want them to be.
    [br]
    But that’s backwards, right? Authentic leaders don’t watch polls to win popularity contests, or calibrate their convictions to win elections. They do the hard work of first setting goals, and then taking initiative.
    [br]
    They spend money on projects that are for the public good, and not merely on projects that help them while they are in office. Genuine leaders are transparent and they cut costs first, instead of raising your taxes. They set examples of good behavior for us, instead of merely legislating what’s good for us. They don’t blame, and they take responsibility for their actions.
    [br]
    As long as government has more of our money than good ideas, this type of leader will become more nostalgic in today’s “modern” world – and increasingly rare among elected officials everywhere.
    [br]
    In fact, Margaret Thatcher once wrote, “Do you know that one of the great problems of our age is that we are governed by people who care more about feelings than they do about thoughts and ideas?” Maybe that’s why our federal government spent almost $600,000 to study where in a chimpanzee’s brain they get the idea to throw feces. Or why they spent $200 million to fund a reality television show in India to advertise U.S. cotton.
    [br]
    Or why Congress spent over $1 trillion in economic stimulus spending, when the results were record unemployment rates and the highest number ever of Americans collecting food stamps. Is there really any question that it was a good idea?
    [br]
    Or was it really a good idea for the President to propose a $1.5 trillion health care expansion and a $15 billion Medicaid bailout, when over 93,000 of our fellow Louisianans are still receiving cancellation notices for their health insurance, and premium costs are expected to rise, even for healthy citizens of our state, by an average of 266 percent this year?
    [br]
    Is there really any question that $3.7 billion in emergency spending on immigration is a good idea right now, when the current administration is encouraging the very activity that makes $3.7 billion in spending necessary in the first place? If this President won’t enforce immigration laws, aren’t we are only encouraging more illegal activity, and the billions in spending needed to deal with it?
    [br]
    These are all proof-positive examples of a system of government that has more of your money than they do good ideas. If the government spending more of your money was all that was needed to reduce the unemployment rate, pay down the federal debt, decrease the poverty rate, lower healthcare costs, and increase national security at our borders, wouldn’t we have achieved all of this long, long, long ago?
    [br]
    Especially in this election year, the leadership model for our elected officials, which currently measures leadership success by money and power, must be retired, and sent off to the scrap yard of history. We must elect leaders now who have more ideas – and not just more of our money – to solve our country’s most pressing problems.
    [br]
    Perhaps it is true that politics is the only profession for which no preparation is thought necessary. But if this remains the conventional wisdom, then how can we really be surprised with the results?

  • Space Invaders

    Space Invaders

    By Louis Avallone
    –
    Do you remember the game Space Invaders? Released in 1978, it revolutionized video games by allowing the players to “stay alive”, or to play the game longer on a single quarter or token – just as long as their high scores kept rising. In other words, the better you played the game, the more “bonus” time you were rewarded and you could continue playing the game, all on the same quarter.

    Most modern arcade games, however, no longer even keep track of the scores. There’s often not even an option to save the high score by entering your initials, and thus not much incentive to earn “bonus” time by playing the game exceptionally well.

    Unfortunately, and in this important election year, the same can be said for our modern day elected officials – there seems to be no incentive for them to perform exceptionally well to earn re-election. One reason may be that voters already, and overwhelmingly, re-elect incumbents, regardless of their “high scores”, or lack thereof.

    That’s a pattern, all the way from the White House to Congress and to any mayor’s office, in any town, and everywhere in between. You see, we continue re-electing folks, or rewarding them with “bonus” time, even when their “high scores” simply are not rising.

    And whether it was the criminal malfeasance of former Mayor Ray Nagin in New Orleans (who was re-elected to a second term), or the low public approval scores for the U.S. Congress (which are at historically low levels), we can’t help ourselves when it comes to incumbents, it seems.

    Incumbent candidates, seeking re-election to the U.S. House of Representatives, have won 80% of the time, over the past 40 years.

    This means that an incumbent candidate is almost guaranteed re-election, even while the public approval rating of Congress is in the basement at 15%.

    Consider also that three out of the last five mayors of Shreveport were re-elected to a second term in office, even while our population growth remained stagnant, our property taxes remained the highest in the state, our city’s public works infrastructure was crumbling, and now, just last week, we learned that the City of Shreveport’s Pension Plan Fund is $120 million short from being able to meet all of its obligations to city workers. Goodness. Gracious.

    Now consider also incumbent Mary Landrieu, who is seeking her third term in the U.S. Senate this year. She votes 97% of the time with President Obama, even though Obama lost Louisiana in the 2012 election. She told Louisianans in 2009 that if they liked their health insurance plan they could keep their plan, and of course, that turned out to be untrue (92,739 Louisianans actually received health insurance cancellation notices).

    And even still, with all of that dirty laundry, election polling indicates she, as the incumbent, is in a statistical dead heat with her leading challenger, Bill Cassidy.

    So what gives? Why do we keep re-electing incumbents, if their results are so poor and our approval of the job they are doing is so low? Maybe it’s because it’s easier for us to heap anger and disappointment upon an institution, such as Congress, rather than the guy or gal running for re-election who is also a member of your church and whom you see at the grocery store or at Little League. Maybe it’s also because the incumbent has more name recognition, or has easier access to campaign finances, or government resources.

    Whatever the reasons, we are electing more and more incumbents every year, and largely without justification. Since 1972, incumbents have enjoyed a 3-2 advantage over their opponents. Today, it’s grown to a 4-1 advantage.

    It’s time to keep score. And during this important election year, we would all be wise to only elect incumbents, or award those candidates “bonus time” only so long as their results, or their high score, is rising.

    And for most voters, that means re-electing candidates that are good listeners, intelligent, approachable, and are willing to work hard – candidates who are more interested in doing what’s best for their constituents, rather than in how they will get re-elected again.

    To elect any other candidate this election year calls to mind the old adage, “If you keep doing what you’re doing, you’ll keep getting what you’re getting.” In some instances, it may be time for another candidate to take a turn at “play”. And for those other candidates, it should just be “game over”.