Burn the Witch
We can totally afford this kind of behavior right now.
By Leon H Wolf Posted in Bobby Jindal | Club for Growth | Republicans | Spending — Comments (18) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
Reasonable minds may disagree about the propriety of the pay raise that the Louisiana Legislature has decided that it needs. To my mind, $16K is a remarkably low salary for even part-time duties of that nature. By way of perspective, I used to live in a very small town in Alaska, and our city council members were paid $12,000 a year. This was 19 years ago. I understand that some people don't like the idea that Jindal appears to be giving a quid pro quo here - the raises for his ethics reforms - but it's hard for me to get very exercised about what the legislature is getting in return. It's especially small potatoes considering the need for serious ethics reform in Lousiana.
However, some conservative commentators, presumably fans of other Vice Presidential candidates have decided to flat-out beclown themselves over this issue. Apparently, Jindal's acquiescence in the legislative pay raises establish conclusively that he is a witch, and therefore must be burned.
More below...
Crouere's article is loaded with a heavy dose of "I'm from Louisiana, and I've seen Bobby Jindal up close, so I know he's not conservative and you'll have to trust me on that." For those not so inclined to throw one of the party's brightest stars under the bus on the word of Jeff Crouere, he essentially raises three data points that establish that Jindal is "not conservative." They are:
1. Jindal's acquiescence in the legislative pay raise. This has already been covered above. I haven't the foggiest why giving the Louisiana Legislature a greater opportunity for legal pay is per se not "conservative." It may or may not be good policy; it may or may not be a good idea at this time, but unless you're under the belief that any conservative doctrine per se opposes legislative pay raises, this argument is more or less demagogic hysteria.
2. Jindal's alleged reticence to approve a tax decrease. We are left to guess what evidence Crouere or anyone else might have of Jindal's reticence, or that he was "dragged kicking and screaming" to the table for these tax decreases. Provided that we believe this allegation, however, we are not given any information with which we might decide whether this tax decrease was a good idea at this time, was affordable, or was necessary. I guess that the "conservative" position is that all tax decreases must be immediately supported with no reservation at all times, no matter their size, scope, or tax basis affected. If any Republican opposes any tax decrease (or, in the case of Jindal, is too slow supporting it), they are a witch and must be burned. Folks, this is not the analysis of thinking, reasonable conservatives.
Many of you know that some of us here at RedState are fans of Rhode Island Governor Donald Carcieri. When we ran some pro-Carcieri pieces here at RedState, we received some blowback from Club for Growth and others who declared that Carcieri was insufficiently "pro-growth" to serve as Vice President. Carcieri has been involved in a constant and ongoing budget struggle since he took office in one of the deepest-blue states in the union. He one year balanced the budget by laying off over 1,000 government employees. He recently presided over a balanced budget which did not include broad-based tax increases. So what was Carcieri's mortal sin? Apparently, he once supported increasing the cigarette tax in Rhode Island. Burn the witch!
3. It is alleged that Jindal's first budget was larger than the previous one submitted by Blanco. Was it larger, adjusting for inflation? Was it larger adjusting for the necessary importation of foreign goods that have been affected by the weakness of the dollar? Was the increase in size due to pork-barrel spending, or due to spending on legitimate projects to rebuild Louisiana infrastructure? We are left to guess at these particulars. The budget is larger; ipso facto it is worse (by this standard, Reagan was one of the worst Presidents America has ever had). Burn the witch!
As it happens, I agree that Jindal needs more experience before he should be VP or President. However, these shrieking denunciations by fiscons of every minute deviation from standards that are arbitrary and do not account for the realities of the real world. This kind of behavior is especially hysterical coming from the same wing of the party that frequently characterizes social conservatives as rigid and inflexible. The reality, of course, is that we all should fight for broad-based conservative governance, while accepting the fact that our elected officials sometimes have to live and operate in a world that is not perfect, and that sometimes, compromise is necessary to achieve a larger goal. It is by all means appropriate to note that Jindal (and Palin, the subject of this ridiculous attack from the CfG) may lack the necessary experience to be VP. It is another to treat the most talented GOP backbenchers in the country like they are witches who deserve to be burned. With the state that the party is in now, let's not pre-emptively start chucking people who are 98% with us overboard just so Saint Sanford can become Vice President.
« BREAKING: Bobby Jindal vetoes pay raise. — Comments (29) | Shame on the Louisiana Legislature — Comments (10) »
Burn the Witch 18 Comments (0 topical, 18 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »
They don't just get $16,800. They also get $6,000 in unvouchered expenses each year, plus a per diem of $143 per day (that adds over $12,000 to their total compensation package). They also have taxpayer subsidized (up to 75%) healthcare, and a gas subsidy of 50.5 cents per mile to and from Baton Rouge each week of the session.
only rich people with amassed wealth can afford to be a legislator. Also, a low salary only increases the temptation to take bribes to supplement one's income.
The salary should be high enough to give anyone the ability serve.
I'm not here to argue the merits of the pay raise. I tend to support it for the simple reason that the $16,800 amount was set 28 years ago. It is therefore totally out of date and needs to be adjusted. Period. We can now discuss the amount of the adjustment needed. Looking at stats here going back to 1980 (which I believe is when they set these pay amounts), my understanding of the table leads me to believe that the price index has more than doubled since then. That means that, in order to be making the same real wage, an individual who made $16,800 in 1980 must make at least $33,600 today. Funny, that's not that far off from what they settled on (I believe the final number was $37,500). This also doesn't bother to adjust any of the expenses and allowances they get (I'm not sure if those have been adjusted since 1980).
That all said, whether you agree with it or not, the fact of the matter is that folks in Louisiana don't stop dealing with each other after this issue is concluded. Gov. Jindal has to deal with these very same legislators for another 18 months, and he has a lot of plans. Even if they are "punished" at the ballot box for stymieing the governor's agenda, that won't happen until Nov. 2009. So the whiners would have Jindal give away half his term in the hopes that he can get enough of the legislators defeated a year and a half from now so that, just as he's gearing up for re-election, he might be able to get something done.
On the other hand, he can give the legislators a long-overdue adjustment in their salary and preserve his influence and his ability to get his agenda through this year and next. This was a decision that I'm sure was discussed by Jindal and his political people at length, and I'm sure they came to the conclusion that the pay raise was not worth losing on much more important reforms and programs.
Put it this way - if giving my legislator an extra $20,000 a year in salary would insure passage of strict ethical rules, tort reform, school choice, market-based health care reform, and a lean efficient budget (all of which might die in committee otherwise), I might be willing to make that trade.
We pay our legislators here in NY a lot more for a lot less.
"No compromise with the main purpose, no peace till victory, no pact with unrepentant wrong." - Winston Churchill
While I agree that pay raises are needed to attract talent, 123% raises in lean times defy logic, not to mention conservative dogma. Add the fact that one of his campaign pledges was to oppose pay raises and you can understand citizen outrage.
this is part of a deal the guv had to make with the legislature to get what he wants later.
Mike DeVine’s Charlotte Observer columns
www.theminorityreportblog.com
"The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race." - The Chief Justice
...there's no way that McCain is going to offer Jindal the nod this go-round, and less chance of Jindal taking it.
The Fuzzy Puppy of the VRWC. I've been usurped!
Let the guy clean up LA, it's great practice for cleaning up DC. And I can't imagine -- after dealing with bred-in graft, political machines, corruption, organized crime, and every imaginable vice -- that he would ever walk into Washington with a Bambi-style "New Tone".
"New Tone" might be right, but it would be a Buford Pusser kind of new tone.
My feeling inre Jindal is that he will be the 45th POTUS, no matter who is 44th.
Impeach the 5 usurpers
down the dude from LA.
I'm not sure I agree with all aspects of the legislative pay raise, but I'm not all freaked out Jindal has deferred the issue to them.
I think he still has his clothes on and a whole lot more to come.
Ready for VP? Naw, save him for later. There are plenty other good choices out there.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Just a typical, small town, British-American girl...
Got no problem with going after BJ on the issue, but to denounce him utterly was un-called for and seems it may bespeak a hidden agenda.
Mike DeVine’s Charlotte Observer columns
www.theminorityreportblog.com
"The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race." - The Chief Justice
This is hilarious. I graduated high school with Jeff Crouere. He sat in front of me in Geology class in our senior year.
I remember him leaving a school function early to go see Reagan when he campaigned in New Orleans in the fall of 1980.
I still live here in NO, and I can't say I'm all that worked up about the raise. I have certainly had many pay adjustments since 1980. I believe Jeff has over reacted and is mainly trying to bring attention to himself. I used to listen to him on his radio show he had here. He was always more a moderate republican and it is humorous to here him be critical of someone not being conservative enough. I stopped listening to his show because he was so spineless. Nobody paid attention to him in high school and that never really changed, and I think he is trying to make himself relevant.
Leon, while reasonable people can disagree on the pay raise, you neglect to mention one of the main reasons Jindal is taking flak on the issue. During the campaign, he vowed to prohibit a legislative pay raise. Now, he's flipped on the issue. Maybe it's a necessary quid pro quo to accomplish more important things, but it's still a blatant broken campaign promise.
"If any Republican opposes any tax decrease (or, in the case of Jindal, is too slow supporting it), they are a witch and must be burned."
But he turned me into a Newt!
Hang all traitors and secessionists! Hang them high!
- Me
and I love Sanford, myself, probably think he or Carcieri would be the best choice, but I'm also eagerly awaiting the day when Jindal and Palin are more seasoned and ready for prime time.
We saw way too much of this sort of behavior in the primaries, too - not that the candidates didn't deserve scrutiny for their various apostasies large and small, but what tends to get lost is perspective.
"No compromise with the main purpose, no peace till victory, no pact with unrepentant wrong." - Winston Churchill