#301 LA’s Overdetention Problem & the Week Ahead

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
(00:01):
Hey, good morning everybody.
Welcome to the state of freedom.
It's another week, another week of session and there's a lot to talk about.
We thought we would be having Caroline Gabriel, who's an attorney at William Most's firmjoining us this morning, but she was unable to join us.
So we will just be giving you an overview of the week ahead and there is plenty, plentythere.

(00:27):
Before we get into it, let me start us off right with the scripture of the day.
It's Proverbs chapter 12 verses 2 and 3 and it says,

(00:57):
Y'all, not the Lord's flavor.
I'm sure it's a good flavor.
the Lord's favor and the Lord's flavor.
I want the Lord's flavor.
We are the Lord's flavor.
All right.
The Lord's favor flows to those whose hearts and intentions are pure.
There's something so valuable to the Lord about a pure and a teachable heart, you know,and there are the ones, the people who have a pure and teachable heart, these are the ones

(01:24):
who are going to enjoy his favor and remain connected to him even when difficulties inlife come.
And this passage says that a devious heart invites his condemnation, which sounds prettystrong, but that's not something that the lovers of God need to fear as long as we keep
inviting him to search our hearts and motives and as we respond appropriately when hecorrects us.

(01:47):
And Paul reiterates this point in chapter seven and eight of Romans, he says, now myrenewed mind is fixed on and submitted to God's righteous principles.
So now the case is closed.
There remains no accusing voice of condemnation against those who are joined in life unionwith Jesus, the anointed one.

(02:08):
So be encouraged.
If you are seeking the Lord, there's absolutely no condemnation for you.
And in fact, the gift of the Lord's favor is with you.
ah However, if you're devious and not turning to him, then yeah, you will um be subject tohis condemnation.
until you do.

(02:29):
Yeah.
You know, it's hard, Daniel, to...
It's simple, but it's difficult sometimes to fully surrender and to stop the habit ofself-condemnation.
You know, when you really think about it, it's overwhelming to think that there's nocondemnation in Christ ah because we are often busy condemning ourselves, you know, and

(02:53):
unable to forgive ourselves and, you know...
It can be difficult to do, to recognize.
like, what do you mean, me?
Are you serious?
I mean, it's like, what do mean there's no condemnation?
Look at all the stupid things I've done in my life.
But that really is the devil talking to us.
ah
don't get any rewards for hanging on to unforgiveness for ourself, you know?

(03:15):
don't.
In fact, we do ourselves a profound disservice.
ah But it's all unmerited grace.
We really can't do it ourselves.
It's only God's grace that allows us the sort of liberation that comes through Him.
uh And we have to remember that.
No more self-condemnation.
That's right.
I like that.
Chris, have, I mean, it's Tuesday, but it feels like it's Thursday already.

(03:42):
Yesterday was a busy day at the Capitol, which is pretty unusual for a Monday mid-session,I would say.
There was a fair bit going on, not that much that we were following closely, but a couplethings.
And why don't we start out with um what hit committee yesterday was

(04:02):
Representative Raymond Cruz brought back his uh bill to establish gold and silver as legalcurrency in the state, his house bill 386, and it passed by the thinnest margin possible.
Yeah, past seven to six, it was a streamlined version of his original bill because it willnot have the specific backing of the state and there will not be a depository set up.

(04:34):
But it does establish gold and silver as transactional currency in Louisiana and can beused with a gold back debit card, just like fiat money.
So it is a step in the right direction.
it's still a good bill, still a good movement forward.

(04:55):
But unfortunately, there were some Republicans who, despite the fact that it wascompletely not objectionable, he cured their original objections when he went in the first
time.
And yet still there were a number of Republicans who voted against this very importantbill.
And it passed out of uh out of commerce, House Commerce seven to six.

(05:18):
But the Republicans, Danielle, who still voted against it for the second time, do you liketo who they are?
Representative Kim Carver, Representative Troy Abear, Representative Jessica Domaine,Representative Neil Reiser, Representative Vincent St.
Blanc, Representative Peggy Thomas, all Republicans who voted at

(05:43):
Polly Thomas, I'm sorry, my bad, who voted against it nonetheless.
Dixon McMakin, to his credit, switched his vote from the first time that it went before toenable it to pass seven to six.
But it is, obviously we're thankful that the bill passed and is going on to the Housefloor, but it's unfortunate in a Republican dominated commerce committee that the vote was

(06:06):
even that close.
Well, it's despicable.
And I think, Chris, we should go and look at the bios of these committee members becauseI'm convinced that not a single one of them understands anything about the free enterprise
system to start with at the most basic level.
The other thing is this just proves, yeah, I'm absolutely right.

(06:27):
I have no doubt.
I have no doubt that I'm right.
And the other uh point I just want to make is, ah I almost, I had a great thought.
Chris.
Oh, it just shows that their objections were hollow to start with.
Their objections, if their objections were truly allayed as, you know, Representative Cruztook to heart what they said, he changed the bill accordingly, he re-presented the bill in

(06:56):
a format that should be palatable based on their strong objections, stated objections, andthey still refuse to vote for it.
That means that those objections
We're not real.
Yes, and it was because once again, the bankers, the banking uh industry, the LouisianaBankers Association uh was against the bill.

(07:18):
So once again, these Republicans sided with uh big banks instead of with ordinaryLouisiana citizens who deserve to have every economic option, including transactional gold
and silver.
So seven, six vote.
Fortunately, it's going on to the House floor and we're going to keep pushing hard.
Yeah, while they continue to gaslight us and tell us that they're protecting us fromourselves.

(07:41):
Yes, exactly.
Protecting us from our own choices and our own freedom.
Yeah, it is despicable.
And there was one other vote yesterday, Danielle, that I want to tell you about.
This was House Bill 685 by Emily Schennevere.
And we've talked about this before.
This is the bill, the DEI bill, Diversity, Equity and Inclusion, that will abolish these

(08:06):
leftist Marxist concepts like critical race theory, diversity, equity, and inclusion, ahdisdain for the constitution, will abolish those concepts entirely from our public
agencies in the state of Louisiana.
What Republicans could possibly oppose this, could vote against this?

(08:29):
Who knows the poison that these concepts and these doctrines cause?
Well, this bill
Yeah, yeah, right.
Well, I guess so, yeah.
So this was on the House floor yesterday for final vote.
It passed, thank God, 57 to 32, but there were several...
That's not nearly wide enough for a bill like this.

(08:50):
I'm thankful for the Republicans who supported it, obviously, but there were severalRepublicans who voted against this bill.
And one of them was Representative Vincent Cox.
One of them was Representative Beth Billings.
Also a Republican.
One of them was representative Jeff Wiley.
Three Republicans, it looks like, voted against a bill to abolish Marxist concepts fromour public agencies in the state of Louisiana.

(09:18):
Emily Chenovere did a fabulous job defending her bill on the floor.
I think it's worth also mentioning the Republicans who were absent for this critical
clearly there were a number of them.
That doesn't add up to 103.
No, no, there were absent for this critical vote.
Representative Boriak, Representative Broad, Representative Domaine, RepresentativeFontenot, Representative uh Freyberg, Representative Gadbury, Representative Hilferty,

(09:51):
Representative Kerner, Representative Jacob Landry, Representative Muscarello,Representative Stagney, Representative Ventrilla.
and Representative Wilder were all absent for this vote.
And do know what's somewhat suspicious about this?
All of these who were absent for this vote were present for the vote immediately precedingthis vote on the floor.

(10:17):
So I don't know what the motive is to be absent for this vote, which is so important, butthese Republicans were absent and it's worth mentioning in addition to the three, as I
said, who voted no on it.
Yeah.
And for some of those, can assume that maybe it was time for a restroom break.

(10:37):
This is what I would like to hope, Chris.
I'd like to hope that it was time for a restroom break.
They felt this was a strong bill that was going to pass no problem.
And they took the opportunity to go and get some refreshments.
But the truth is, a lot of those names are names that we consistently hear on the wrongside of issues.
So it's just a little difficult to continually try and assume the best.

(11:02):
Exactly, No doubt about it.
Did you have anything else you wanted to talk about from what happened yesterday, Chris,before we move on to Tuesday?
but I did want to reiterate once again, Cox, Billings, and Wiley all voted against thisDEI bill.
All Republicans.
Yeah.
unbelievable.
Well, would be, it'd be interesting to know what their objection was.

(11:26):
Yeah, it would be interesting.
You know, I don't know that there is an objection that's palatable because the bill isvery good.
Anybody can go read it, HB 685.
And it's high time, it's past time, to be honest with you, that this garbage gets out ofour public agencies.
Yeah, yeah.
Well, I hope that and a lot more gets out of our public agencies.

(11:48):
perhaps even some of the people who are in our public agencies.
Yeah, they can go.
They can go right along with it.
All right.
So today is going to be quite a busy day starting in-house natural resources andenvironment.
Nine o'clock.
Chris, I believe you are planning to be down there to testify on Senator Facy's SB 46.

(12:12):
This is his bill that would ban geoengineering and weather modification.
That one is up this morning.
Yes.
And keep in mind HB 608, which is the companion bill on this in the House byRepresentative Coats passed last week.
This is the Senate version, SB 46, Senator Mike Facy.

(12:32):
uh And anybody who listens to our show uh understands the dangers of this chemtrails, ofall these chemicals and these dangerous toxins that are being pushed out of the back of
these airplanes into our skies and then fall on us.
ah
This bill will prohibit that.
And as you said, it's going before House Natural Resources this morning.
And I do plan to be there to vigorously testify in favor of that bill.

(12:57):
Beautiful.
All right.
And I'll just mention that a couple of people who have not been voting the right way oncarbon capture in that House Natural Resources Committee ah do have Senator Facy as their
senator.
So I'm hopeful that they will ah give him that respect and respect the will of the peopleon this one and vote the right way.

(13:21):
Let's hope so.
This is one of those bills where why would a conservative Republican object to a bill likethis?
Yeah.
mean, Chris, as I've been talking to people this week, I mean, which it seems like it'sbeen two weeks this week and it's only Tuesday.
ah One thing that continually comes to mind is that this party system is so corrupt.

(13:46):
know, our parties are so infiltrated.
Republicans are just, mean, I've heard a lot of people say this.
You know, I've never been stabbed in the back by a Democrat.
They always come at me head first.
You know, you know where they're coming from.
It's the Republicans who stabbed me in the back.
And someone said that if they, if we could see what, what all the stabbings look like,would look, they would look like a porcupine.

(14:10):
So it's just, it's just unbelievable.
And I think that's why it's so important that we remain vigilant.
It's also so important why folks go to lacag.org and do the calls to action.
because we have to continue the drum beat of pressure on these legislators because wecannot ever assume they're going to do the right thing, ever.

(14:31):
no, you really can't.
ah Many of them do the right thing because of pressure, not because of principle.
Interesting point, Danielle, in line with what you just said.
Tucker Carlson, I heard him say the other night that exactly what you just said, that it'snot even, it's not the Democrats who really pose the most sinister threat to us.

(14:53):
It is the Republicans.
Because the Democrats ah tell you what they believe.
There's no question about it.
They don't hide it from you.
whereas Republicans are much more deceptive in terms of their betrayal of the citizens.
And so you have to watch them much, much more closely because they understand that theyhave a vested interest often in concealing what they're really doing in the legislature

(15:18):
from their own voters because they know that they couldn't be reelected if their votersknew often what they're actually doing.
And that's the reason why we exist, to keep track of all this and to make sure that theirvoters
do know what's really going on.
And I think that's the danger of having such a deep red state is that these politiciansknow they can't get elected with a D behind their name in a lot of uh localities.

(15:44):
And so they just switched to Republican, but they keep all of their values.
keep all of their, ah I'll just say values.
And then they bring those.
But they bring them under the sheen, under the cover of conservatism because that's whatgot them elected is these conservative talking points.

(16:04):
And then they come and behave, you know, according to their values or according to thespecial interest pressure because they don't have values.
And that's the big, I think, danger of Republican dominated states.
And it's exactly why we're seeing what we're seeing right now.

(16:26):
Very well said.
exactly why we saw what happened in 2020 up till now.
Yeah, very well said, Danielle.
And again, know, most uh organizations, they track floor votes, Senate floor votes andHouse floor votes.
They don't really pay too much attention to what goes on in committee.

(16:48):
If a bill dies in committee, they don't really talk about that.
ah But we do.
In addition to that, those committee votes are so important or those committee absencesare so important as well.
Additionally, with regard to the floor of votes, which we also follow, it's not onlyimportant to know who votes for and against important legislation, it's important to track

(17:12):
who wasn't there for the vote.
And if there's a pattern of absences, one of the ways that these Republicans try toconceal what they're really doing is simply by not being there for the vote.
Because again, the tracking organizations usually just track
who voted for and who voted against.
And they usually don't follow who wasn't there.

(17:34):
We follow who wasn't there, as in the case of HB 685, where there was 10 or 11 Republicansin a relatively close vote on a very important bill who were not there for the vote.
And I won't give many of them the benefit of the doubt, as you said, Danielle, but whenthe ones who were absent for HB 685 were present at the vote immediately preceding that,

(17:58):
that does raise some suspicion as to why they were not there for that vote.
Yeah.
And I think Chris, one other uh aspect that we'll be tracking, we do track that othergroups do not track is decorum.
Are you just straight up rude to people who come and testify?
Are you straight up rude unnecessarily to your colleagues?
That's something that matters to me.

(18:19):
I think it matters to you.
And it's something that we will be reporting on whenever we see it, we'll call it out.
And it's very important to do that.
It's possible to engage in vigorous and heated debate and keep it on the issues.
Yeah, be respectful.
That's it.
All right, Chris.
Well, OK.
Also happening today after our long little rabbit trail there, House and GovernmentalAffairs at 930 in Room 2 is Senator Alan Seabaugh's SB 109.

(18:51):
And this is his constitutional amendment, our proposed constitutional amendment to providefor foreign donations and elections, just keeping foreign donations out of elections.
And I find it very hysterical that Senator Seabaugh is bringing this and he cares sodeeply about keeping foreign interference out of our elections, but doesn't seem to care
or actually vigorously, vigorously defends the right to keep foreign interference in ourelections through the voting computers.

(19:19):
Yeah, there's a real dichotomy there for sure.
And I think it's simply because Senator Seabaugh doesn't uh believe really in the face ofoverwhelming evidence at this point that computer-based voting systems are subject to
malicious hacking and fraud and switching of election results, despite what PresidentTrump has said, despite what Tulsi Gabbard has said, despite what Elon Musk has said, that

(19:44):
these computer-based voting systems are not only hackable, but
have been hacked and are subject to foreign interference.
it's a good bill, SB 109, as far as it goes, because it does prohibit foreign money in anyfacet of our election system in Louisiana.
ah State elections, ballot propositions, all the rest of it, but it does not say anythingabout ah the vulnerability of these computer-based voting systems.

(20:16):
as it relates to foreign adversaries getting into those systems, intruding into thosesystems.
So you're right.
And our system is never going to be complete and invulnerable to foreign interferenceuntil we understand how vulnerable the computers are.
Chris, it's not a difficult concept, right?

(20:36):
mean, anyone who has had their identity stolen, anyone who's had their credit cardcompromised knows that you can hack just about anything.
And if uh you found out that your credit card was um stolen, basically, you know, justonline stolen, and people started using it, would you just not call and cancel it?

(21:00):
Or would you just let them run up your bill?
That's basically the concept.
that's exactly right.
And the idea, Danielle, I know we've talked about this before, the idea that a piece ofpaper, paper component, as our secretary of state calls it, that is spit out by a
hackable, vulnerable machine or computer, that ah that is reliable and that that makes ourelections truly auditable is a joke.

(21:30):
It's an absolute joke.
But Nancy Landry is trying to align herself or suggest that she's aligned with the visionof the Trump administration, despite President Trump's EOs that are raising powerful
alarms against these computer-based voting systems.
She thinks because a piece of paper is spit out of a computer, that that makes ourelections secure.

(21:52):
And it's very important for our listeners to understand that it does not.
And I'm not sure she thinks it does, Chris.
I think that she thinks that may be palatable to voters.
But I, you know, and maybe she can, she can convince us that that is auditable, but Idon't, I'm not convinced that she truly believes it's auditable.
Anyway.

(22:12):
All right.
Also today in House administration of criminal justice at 10 o'clock, we have House Bill457 by Representative Denise Marcel.
This is her solitary confinement bill.
Yeah, and we asked Representative Marcel to include in that bill uh faith materials whenan inmate is in solitary confinement.

(22:33):
She said she included that in the bill.
It's going before criminal justice in the House this morning, ah and we support thatlegislation.
Yeah.
All right.
There's a lot up for final passage today on the house side.
First up is House Bill 75 by Representative Danny McCormick.
And this is related to compensation for CCS pipeline people who have the pipeline on theirproperty, right?

(23:00):
That's correct.
And basically what what representative McCormick's bill says is that if a person ah isdoes not opt in uh for the pipeline, in other words, does not voluntarily allow their land
to be seized or used for carbon capture and sequestration pipelines and ends up beingforced into ah what they call the unit, which is all affected landowners.

(23:26):
ah If they hold out.
and ultimately they're forced into the unit, they cannot be penalized in any way in termsof the compensation that they receive for having to surrender their land.
In fact, the bill guarantees that they receive maximum compensation, and that's why it'san important bill.
Yeah, it's an important bill because our legislators won't do the right thing or have yetto do the right thing.

(23:50):
this is a band aid, but it is a band aid that is helpful.
Yeah.
All right.
Also up today for uh vote on the House floor is House Bill 160 by Representative KellyHennessy Dickerson.
And this is her ethics complaints bill.
Yeah, and this is a bill that, Representative Hennessey, as we talked about before,Danielle, uh was very amenable to our suggestion that she include in this bill uh

(24:18):
whistleblower language to protect uh people who make a complaint uh to the ethics boardagainst a public official or anyone else for that matter, are not subject to any kind of
retaliation.
So the bill does two things.
The bill makes the complainant no longer anonymous.
So they have to disclose their identity at some point in the process.

(24:38):
uh And to counterbalance that, there's a pretty strong provision against any sort ofretaliation against the complainant.
uh And the complainant, can bring suit and there are other penalties in the bill toprotect the complainant from retaliation.
There's a couple good bills this session to tighten up the way the ethics board ishandled.

(25:03):
So I appreciate this one being brought by Representative Dickerson.
Next up is House Bill 405 by Representative Matthew Willard.
This one is requiring the Secretary of State to provide some updates with relate to anylaws that are passed that affect the way our elections are run.
Yeah, it's a transparency bill that requires the Secretary of State to be uh open andfully disclosed prominently uh changes in our election laws.

(25:32):
One of the things that you suggested to me, Danielle, that needs to be included in thisbill is a specific provision with regard to procurement where the Secretary of State has
to uh be very transparent about the
process whereby she is trying to secure a new voting system for our state because there'sno more important issue.

(25:54):
When are the meetings, when are the public meetings, Secretary Landry?
What are you going to be discussing at these meetings with regard to the procurementprocess?
At what stage of the process are you in?
When will the public have an opportunity to come in and make their opinions known and feltabout how we feel about the proposed new system?

(26:16):
because she has not been fully transparent on this issue or really on a number of otherissues related to our election system.
So I think it's important to add a provision in this bill that requires her to be fullytransparent with regard to the procurement process.
Yeah, and I think uh fair notice for all those public meetings as well, related whetherit's related to the procurement process, which is first and foremost um in terms of

(26:42):
importance, but any public meetings, can't just give people, I mean, people need fairnotice to be able to show up from all over the state.
Of course they do and they would show up if they had the notice.
Yeah.
All right.
House Bill 400 is also up today for final vote on the House floor and that's uhRepresentative Genevieve's parental consent for minors.

(27:07):
This hopefully is not going to be too controversial today.
Chris, you have any predictions on this one?
I think it should pass.
there won't be too many absent Republicans.
uh Can you imagine, once again, Danielle, can you imagine Republicans either voting no orbeing absent on a bill that simply, as a broad rule, requires that parents or guardians of

(27:30):
minors be notified and consent to major surgical procedures or medical services providedto their minor children?
Would you ever think that we would be living in an age when you would have to wonder aboutwhether Republicans are going to vote for that bill or show up for that important vote?

(27:51):
I don't think so.
Yeah.
But we're going to be watching it very, very closely.
I believe it's going to pass and I certainly hope it does and it should passoverwhelmingly.
It should, yeah.
And honestly, bipartisanly.
Well, exactly.
mean, there are some good Democrats.
You and I have found ourselves on a number of occasions on the side of the Democrats oncertain bills that are very, very important.

(28:17):
So I think that Democrats, a number of Democrats may come on board and vote in favor ofthis.
passed in favor, several voted in favor in committee.
So I think, I think we can expect that.
Yeah.
All right.
Senate final passage today.
Uh, we have SB 80, which is Senator Greg Miller, one of, uh who continues to surprise me,not in a good way, uh, his exit polling bill that he is caring for secretary Landry to

(28:48):
silence the voice of the people at the polls.
Yeah, there are uh exactly.
the bill, our listeners know, SB 80, prohibits regular citizens from conducting exitpolls.
And it reserves that quote unquote right to bona fide news gathering organizations likeCNN.

(29:10):
You know, CNN, how much we trust CNN and how much we believe that they're always tellingus the truth.
They're the only ones now who will be able to do uh exit polls, lawful exit polls.
And by the way, I went back and did some research on this, Danielle, looked at the Texaslaw and other states.
There are very few states that have any major restrictions on people being able to do exitpolls.

(29:36):
Most of the states, it's a hundred yards.
If you're non disruptive and you're simply asking questions about how a person votedvoluntarily, then you can do an exit poll.
And there's not one state
that I found that makes a distinction between ordinary law abiding citizens and bona fidenews organizations.

(29:59):
So if this bill passes, we're going to be the only state in the country that specificallyprohibits law abiding citizens from conducting exit polls.
And the reason for this, the reason why Secretary Landrieu is pushing this bill so hard isnot because she's concerned about disruptions.
not because she's concerned about voters being harassed.

(30:21):
That's a complete joke.
The reason why she doesn't want citizens there doing exit polls is because she does notwant the myth that our computer-based voting system is safe and secure to be exploded by
the gathering of real data at voting precincts about how people actually voted and thencomparing it against the official results from that precinct or other precincts.

(30:46):
That's really what's going on here.
Nancy Landry does not want any suspicion raised about computer-based voting systems onwhich she is running at lightning speed to spend $150 million of our tax dollars on that.
So that's what this is all about.
It's an unconstitutional restriction of speech.

(31:09):
It's an unconstitutional restriction of freedom of association.
And it's just a deplorable piece of legislation.
and it's going for final vote on the Senate floor today.
Now it still has to go over to the House after that, but we have a strong call to actionup on this.
So if you care about your free speech, and Danielle, I don't mean to go on too much aboutthis, but a lot of people may look at this and say, why is this a big deal?

(31:36):
I don't do exit polls.
The reason why it's a big deal is that this is how
Liberty is ultimately lost if you don't stand up and oppose on principle a blatantlyunconstitutional restriction of free speech and freedom of association Then it only gets
larger and larger and larger and that's why James Madison said that it is it is a Death bya thousand cuts.

(32:02):
We don't wait until the last minute to stand up for our freedom We need to do it right nowas a matter of principle and precedent
Right.
And as much as I hate those billboards, you know, the ambulance chasing billboards thatline the interstates across our state, it does it.
There's a two edged sword with uh our eagerness to litigate.

(32:26):
And I bet there are any number of attorneys who would be happy to take this on should itmake it all the way through.
This is going to get this is going to have suit so fast and so hard.
I mean, of course,
it ultimately only cost us.
So when our legislature passes unconstitutional bills, we're the ones who pay.

(32:46):
We pay ah for the attorney's on the litigant side, right?
We pay for the attorney's fees on the defendant's side.
Yeah.
exactly.
No question about it.
So it's just bad all the way around.
It's bad constitutionally, it's bad fiscally, and it's just bad policy.
Yeah, I do wish we could get a lot of those criminal defense attorneys who are who arefocused on accidents and insurance claims to focus more on suing for unconstitutional

(33:16):
bills.
I bet we'd have a lot smaller Constitution.
I we'd have a lot fewer, you know, a lot thinner bureaucracy in our state.
Yeah.
All right.
Next up Senate Bill 117 by Senator Blake Miguez.
This is his bill that would ban ultra processed food in schools.
Yeah, and this bill should not have any trouble passing.

(33:40):
It's similar to Senator McMath's bill.
uh Get the junk out of the food.
There are a lot of kids in this state who eat breakfast and lunch at school.
Give them healthy options.
know, that's, that's, this is, this is a no brainer.
You know, especially when you consider the obesity epidemic, Danielle, the chronic diseaseepidemic among our youth, ADHD.

(34:05):
Give them healthy options to eat.
can't imagine why anybody would oppose this.
Yeah.
How about only healthy options?
only healthy options.
Yeah.
All right.
Next up, Senate Bill 39 by Senator Jay Morris.
This is his bill that essentially would say that it's you have no recourse if we if wehold you past your out date in prison.

(34:31):
Fortunately, Danielle, because of uh a lot of concerns raised by us and others, this billhas been gutted to significant degree.
So it's not nearly as nefarious as it was before.
uh In original form, the bill would have essentially immunized the state from liabilityfor their own errors, for keeping inmates in jail well past their out date, which is false

(34:54):
imprisonment.
It's unconstitutional.
It's illegal.
But instead of correcting the problem,
ah They want to immunize the people who create the problem.
Now, fortunately, a lot of the immunity provisions have been cut out of the bill nowbecause of concerns, as I said, but it's still not needed.
The legislation is not needed.

(35:14):
The process whereby an inmate can get some relief for a flagrant violation of theirliberty and their freedom is already onerous enough, and it doesn't need to be made more
onerous through this legislation.
So, you know, I...
You know what's ironic?
Okay, so we have all these tough on crime Republicans, right?

(35:36):
uh Especially in our executive branch, but also in the legislature.
And then we have the biggest jailbreak making national news in New Orleans right now with10 escapees.
Why don't you focus on the criminals you have already detained?
Why don't you focus on uh getting them out of there on time?

(35:57):
rehabilitating them, making sure that there is not a giant hole in the cinder block thatentire groups of men can escape from.
Why don't you focus on that?
This is an embarrassment.
Our state is a laughing stock right now and we're still doubling down to be tough oncrime.
It's ridiculous.
I was wondering whenever I saw uh the faces, the mugshots of those 10 men flash up on thescreen, some of whom look very scary by the way, ah how many of them?

(36:27):
have actually should already be out.
uh
a minute that none of them should be out.
And they probably are all legitimately incarcerated.
So instead of keeping in prison inmates who have served their time and paid their duesweeks and months and years after their outdates, which invites lawsuits, which we pay for,

(36:53):
instead of that, uh why don't you try to keep in jail
the hardened criminals who actually belong there instead of letting them escape.
That's a great point, Danielle.
Maybe we refocus our priorities a bit here.
Yeah, well, maybe some of our, what happens maybe, Chris, if Emily Shenevere's bill passesand we get some of the DEI out of some of these different agencies, maybe we'll have

(37:18):
better managed agencies.
You know what?
And I never even thought about that, but there is a very powerful connection between thediversity, equity and inclusion uh and the lack of merit based performance evaluations and
hiring and that sort of thing.
And the inefficiency with which so many of our public agencies are run, Danielle, becauseit's not about merit.

(37:41):
It's not about excellence very often.
It's about political correctness, which breeds uniform mediocrity.
Yeah, it does.
All right, next up, Senate Bill 214.
This is by Senator Royce Du Plessis.
This would basically give the right, so it would make it so that Commissioner of Insuranceis no longer an elected position, but instead is appointed by the governor.

(38:09):
This is tiring.
This is really tiring.
Obviously, is the pet of the governor, this bill.
should the Commissioner of Insurance, a statewide elected position, not be subject todirect vote of the people?
I don't care what other states are doing.
They're not Louisiana.

(38:30):
And if this were going on in those states and I lived there, I would be opposed to this aswell.
I mean, why do you single out the Commissioner of Insurance?
He should be directly accountable to the people, just like the governor, just like anyother statewide elected official.
But this bill will make
the commissioner of insurance appointed by the governor by way of a nominating committee,ah the speaker of the house, the president of the Senate, the attorney general and other

(38:57):
agencies get to put forward nominees and the governor chooses the commissioner ofinsurance from among that list.
And first of all, it should be elected, as I said, an elected position.
And secondly, why are we
advancing legislation that increases the power of the executive branch in the state ofLouisiana.

(39:19):
When the governor and the executive branch generally already have disproportionate powerunder our constitutional and political system, why would we be doing that instead of
decreasing and diminishing the power of the executive?
The very reason why the legislature does not routinely exercise vigorous oversight as it'ssupposed to do over the executive branch is because they're afraid of the governor.

(39:43):
They're afraid of reprisal, which often is legitimate fear, that there will be reprisal ifthey oppose him.
doesn't justify their inaction by any means, but that's the reality of it.
So why would we be increasing his power?
It doesn't make any sense.
It's SB 214, and by the way, this is being brought by a Democrat, Royce Duplessis, who'sabout as far left.

(40:09):
in the state Senate as you can get.
I can't think of anybody right off who is more left than Royce DuPlessis.
This is the same state senator who wanted to decriminalize uh male adult prostitution inLouisiana, I think a couple of years ago, which failed, fortunately, once we brought uh
the committee's attention to what exactly the bill did.

(40:30):
But the bottom line is this is a terrible bill.
don't know because Governor Landry, you know, you'll never be able to trace this to him.
But I would be very surprised and I'd bet you nine cents to a dime that Governor Landry isbehind this legislation.
Well, I would hope, Chris, that some Democrats uh on the House side or even in the Senatewould take opposition to this.

(40:55):
And I would like to see this amended so that instead of, you know, the governor having theauthority to appoint the insurance commissioner, simply that the insurance commissioner
should have some experience in insurance, because I believe Tim Temple is the firstinsurance commissioner we've had in decades, if not longer, who actually
comes from the industry.

(41:16):
And I'm not saying they need to necessarily come from the industry, but they need to havesome level, a deep level of familiarity with it so that they can do the negotiating uh in
an educated manner.
Whether it's someone who's worked on it from a contracting side or someone who's workedwith insurance companies from a legal side, I think those would be reasonable requirements

(41:40):
for the position.
Exactly.
And Danielle, final point on this from my perspective.
Can you imagine right now if we had a system where the commissioner of insurance wasappointed by Governor Landry?
so let's just say hypothetically, our current commissioner had been appointed by GovernorLandry.
Instead of having a vigorous debate among the governor and the commissioner of insuranceabout the best way to go about solving our insurance problems in Louisiana.

(42:10):
we would have a commissioner insurance that is simply rubber stamping and doing thebidding of the governor.
That's what would be occurring right now.
And that is the danger of what will happen if we come to a point where the governor isappointing the commissioner of insurance in Louisiana.
Well, that's clearly what the governor wants, Chris.
That's clearly what he wants for nearly every position because that's what we're seeing isa strong push to continue to uh give more and more power to the executive.

(42:40):
It's unbelievable.
It's absolutely unbelievable.
uh anyone who understands federalism, as you've said many times on this show, anyone whounderstands a government of, by, and for the people,
would not want that.
And I had high hopes, Chris, that when Governor Landry came in, that he would have thecourage and actually the will, the tenacity, the foresight to start diminishing the power

(43:05):
of the executive while he sat there.
Wouldn't that be a beautiful thing?
Yeah, it would have been very Marcus Aurelius-like, who was a uh great, great uh leader ofthe Roman Empire for 17 or 18 years.
And yet he was very humble, very statesman-like, and never allowed that power to go to hishead, and really did make uh the country and the empire uh much more efficient and much

(43:32):
less corrupt.
You go back, Daniel, and you look at Governor Landry's inaugural address, and I've goneback and read his inaugural address a couple of times now.
And it's very statesman-like in the way that it's written, in the ideals that arearticulated.
And then you go and contrast that with the way he has governed.

(43:55):
the discrepancy between the two is shocking.
And maybe it shouldn't be at this point, but...
But it is.
But anyway.
Yeah.
Okay.
Next up for uh Senate, is this Senate floor debate today?
Yeah, Senate floor debate today is uh Senate Bill 216 by Senator Valerie Hodges.

(44:18):
This is her contract bidding for DOTD uh to discourage delays and incentivize the earlycompletion of road construction projects.
Hopefully you're not expecting too much opposition to this one, Chris.
I don't think so.
And I know this is one of your favorite bills because the bill creates real incentives forit finish the state road projects timely and disincentives not to.

(44:40):
And God knows we need it.
Do we not need more efficiency in our DOTD when it comes to completing these projects?
I mean, I go different places in the state, Danielle, and it seems like they've beenworking on these things, certain things for years and years and years.
And I'm like, why does it take so long to finish these projects?

(45:01):
Well, clearly it's got to be perverse incentives and poor oversight.
I can't come up with any other reasons.
And I think this bill would go a long way in solving that problem.
Yeah, I hope so.
Also by Senator Hodges, her Senate Bill 226, which we know uh was slashed with the sworduh in the committee and gutted out basically everything that was meaningful, that had

(45:26):
teeth, that was going to protect our elections and protect our uh immovable property, uhwas taken out of it.
But it looks like her bill is subject to call.
We saw Senator Morris and Senator Jay Luna give her a very hard time on the Senate floorwith some really just I think just despicable and and I Don't know uh Disingenuous, I

(45:54):
guess is the word I'm looking for questions related related to the nature of her bill
the bill and Senator Luno and Senator Miller by the way sit on the Miller's the chairmanand Luno's on Senate Jude the very committee that gutted SB 226 in original form which
would have halted the procurement of computer-based voting systems until President Trump'sexecutive orders the evaluation that he has ordered is completed on these electronic based

(46:22):
voting systems and would have allowed expropriation of any property
currently owned by a foreign adversary that's located within 50 miles of a criticalinfrastructure facility.
Both of those things were gutted from this bill in committee.
So now it's on the Senate floor.
I don't even know what's left of it at this point, to be honest with you, Danielle.

(46:44):
But the point is, uh we can't forget what occurred.
No, and I'll reiterate a point I made last week, Chris, which is this is this, think, inthe four year span of the legislators term, right, we're in the second year.
So this is the year in a way that's furthest from any election.
So this is the year they think they can go rogue.

(47:06):
They think they can not necessarily be held to account for the way that they vote.
But they are sorely, sorely mistaken if they think that's true.
Yeah.
we are watching them and we will not forget their behavior because next year, coming thesummer, they're gonna be starting to campaign for reelection.
And guess who's gonna be blasting them into next week, into next year, into the nextdecade?

(47:30):
That's gonna be us.
That's going to be us because we're documenting it all right now and we will remind thevoters, just as we're reminding everybody right now, Danielle, about what they're doing.
But at election time, it'll be prominently displayed.
There's no question about that because it has to be.

(47:50):
Yeah, yeah.
So that's my shot across the bow that I'll keep making, reminding people.
We will not forget.
All right, next up on Wednesday, tomorrow's a big day too, Chris.
It's not quite as bad as last week, thankfully.
ah first up in, excuse me, Senate and Governmental Affairs.

(48:15):
There is a House Bill 216 by Representative Steve Jackson.
This is his bill that would simply um mandate that the Board of Ethics meetings berecorded publicly and broadcast publicly.
and they should be.
And it's a good bill and we're going to be supporting it.

(48:35):
All right.
Next is House Bill 577 by Representative Darryl Deshotel This is about procurement forvoting systems.
This is basically giving Secretary of State Nancy Landry everything she wants with acherry on top.
Yes, this is one of a number of pieces of legislation being strongly pushed by theSecretary of State to allow her to streamline this procurement process, to make it easier

(49:02):
and quicker for her to write the check for $150 million worth of computer-based votingsystems.
That's what this bill does.
It's a dangerous bill, HB 577, and we are opposing it and we have a strong call to actionup.
Right now at lacag.org Action Center on 577, we encourage everyone to go and do that callto action immediately.

(49:25):
Yeah, and I can think of any number, literally countless areas of our government thatcould use streamlining and this is not one of them.
This is absolutely not one of them because right now under the normal procurement process,Danielle, it requires competitive bidding.
It requires a protracted process to make sure that what we invest in with regard to ourvoting system is secure, is reliable, is safe.

(49:51):
It's extremely important.
Well, she wants to streamline that whole process, vest herself with almost plenaryauthority, with very little oversight to go forward and do whatever she wants to do.
And 577 is one bill that would allow that to happen.
And it's a very, very, very important that everyone go do this call to action on HB 577.

(50:12):
Yeah.
Also up is House Bill 590 by Representative Annie Spell.
And this is the House companion bill, the statutory companion bill to Senator Seabass billto keep foreign funds out of our elections.
Yes, this is a good bill.
I'll just say the same thing about this that I did about Senator Seabaugh's bill.
These bills should be addressing the vulnerabilities of the computer-based voting systemsas well.

(50:34):
If we're trying to protect our elections from foreign adversaries, ah it's not completewithout a strong provisions related to computer voting in Louisiana.
We do support the bill.
It's good as far as it goes.
It just doesn't go far enough.
Yeah, absolutely.
All right, Chris.
ah what, it's called single object, right?

(50:58):
Single object, that's been the terminology they like to use whenever, the criticalinfrastructure bill that Senator Hodges brought.
I just feel like that could come back around to bite them.
We'll see.
All right.
about HP 471.
I was talking about uh her Senate Bill 226 that they gutted because they said that it wasnot single object, but yeah, dual object.

(51:26):
I think that it can still be single object if they were able to, if someone had thebravery, the fortitude to suggest an amendment to include keeping foreign voting
components, foreign uh mechanical and software components out of our.
election systems.

(51:46):
and Danielle, the reason why they used the dual object objection in Senate Juday as apretext to take all the secretary of state provisions out of it, all the election
provisions out of it, because that dealt with elections and other part of the bill dealtwith other infrastructure issues.
But the bottom line is it's not a dual object because the fundamental thing that all theissues had in common was it all dealt with critical infrastructure.

(52:13):
That's why it was in the same bill.
and it should have remained there.
Yeah, it should have remained there.
All right.
Next up, House Health and Welfare on Wednesday.
We have a lot of good bills that are moving close to getting close to the final to thefinal uh resting place.
We have I mean that in a positive sense, not in a negative sense.

(52:35):
Senate Bill 2 by Senator Mike Facey.
This is his bill to get fluoride out of our water systems.
Praise the Lord.
the Lord for that.
Let's get it out.
ah There is, as we talked about before, Danielle, there is an amendment in the bill uhthat would allow local jurisdictions by vote of 15 % to put it on a parish-wide ballot to

(52:58):
put the fluoride back in if they wanted to.
But the presumption is that it's going out.
We don't think there's going to be a problem with it.
And everybody knows how detrimental all this fluoride is in our water.
Yeah, the only thing I take issue with Chris on this one is its effective date is August1st.

(53:18):
I think that it should be effective immediately.
There's no need for once this bill passes for them to continue to poison us.
I agree.
So it's permissible to poison us for another five or six months.
Right.
Yeah.
OK.
Next up, Senate Bill 14 by Senator Patrick McMath.
This is his uh his maha bill, basically make make Louisiana healthy again, getting a lotof dyes and garbage out of the school um food, food, meals.

(53:47):
very similar to Senator Miguez bill and we support it for the same reasons.
Yeah.
Also up um in the same committee is Senate Bill 19 by Senator Facy, and this is hisivermectin being able to be dispensed without a prescription.
Very, very important bill, very important bill.

(54:07):
uh And, you know, we have a uh call to action up on SB 19 right now.
A lot of people have responded to it.
A lot of people are very interested in this bill uh and most people are supporting it.
And I can't imagine a reason why anybody would not be.
Yeah.

(54:28):
And last but not least, set for House floor debate tomorrow is House Bill 601 byRepresentative Brett Gaiman.
And this is his bill about eminent domain rules for carbon capture.
Interestingly, Danielle, as I may have said on the last show, uh I can't remember, uh butthis bill, which would require a landowner to consent and agree to having carbon capture

(54:55):
sequestration pipelines on their land, uh he doesn't know for sure now if he has theRepublican votes to pass this bill.
Unbelievable.
You know, that simply it's a bill that would protect fundamental private property rightsin Louisiana from carbon capture sequestration pipelines against a landowner's will.

(55:16):
And he doesn't know for sure if he has the votes, which is why I think he had to move itfrom yesterday to Wednesday.
And we have to continue.
We have a call to action up on this one as well.
So please go do this call to action.
These people respond to a lot of public pressure from the citizens.
And often, you said earlier, Danielle, that's the only thing they respond to.

(55:36):
But if HB 601 does not pass, we are going to be documenting meticulously the Republicanswho voted against this or the Republicans who were absent for this legislation.
Yeah.
And Chris, on that note, uh we have a guest coming on Thursday morning for our show.
Her name is Carla Limbs.

(55:57):
She is a sitting representative in the South Dakota legislature.
She's running for lieutenant governor of South Dakota.
And she, along with many others, led the charge in South Dakota to make it so that eminentdomain was not allowed for corporate takeover of private property for carbon capture.

(56:17):
So it will be a very interesting conversation with her on Thursday.
I think very enlightening.
think, you know, we've actually shared some swamp creatures here in Louisiana have takenin some of South Dakota's swamp creatures.
had that conversation with her on the phone yesterday.
So maybe she'll also share a little bit about that with us.
ah
some swamp creatures and Danielle, I want to remind our listeners in South Dakota, therewas a crop of Republicans that killed uh eminent domain, very similar legislation that

(56:51):
good conservatives are trying to pass here in Louisiana.
It was killed in South Dakota a couple of years ago and that crop of Republicans werepunished severely by the citizens at the voting booth.
13 or 14 Republicans were swept out of office.
The very ones who opposed uh that legislation brought in a new crop and they passed thelegislation right now that exists in South Dakota, which is the law prohibiting eminent

(57:20):
domain for carbon capture.
So who knows what may happen here in Louisiana, but I guarantee you our citizens have oureyes on it.
oh
Yeah, because the truth is what we've been saying, Chris.
No one, no one who's looking at this issue honestly wants this.
The only people who want this are the people who see billions of dollars of our taxdollars and billions of dollars worth of 45 Q tax credits, which also is our money, and

(57:51):
they want to make money.
They don't they don't even care whether or not this is actually something that's necessaryor scientifically grounded or actually will help the environment.
In fact, Danielle, if you watched the people.
who opposed all this CCS legislation in our own legislature this session, very, veryrarely, if ever, do you hear the argument based on the environmental good of carbon

(58:21):
capture sequestration.
You hardly ever hear it.
Even they know it's a fraud.
Even they know it's a scam.
The argument that they make is, well, it's going to bring jobs.
It's going to bring jobs.
Yeah, it's going to bring jobs that are propped up and paid for.
with our money.
That's what it's going to do.
Those are not legitimate private enterprise jobs.

(58:41):
This enterprise would fall flat on its face if it were not for federal tax subsidies andour direct tax dollars.
And they know that too.
So the whole thing is a complete scam being perpetrated on our citizens.
And you get back to 601 here, Danielle, which is the most important piece of legislationright now that will give the citizens some protection.

(59:04):
against imminent domain for these pipelines.
601.
We're going to be keeping a very close eye on this.
And I hope the Republicans already have learned a lesson, the ones who opposed the CCSlegislation originally in committee.
And I hope they come on board and do what they need to do to pass this legislation and getit to the governor's desk.
Yeah, I hope so too.

(59:25):
I absolutely hope so too, because I don't think we need to, this is very much like thecockroach bill.
This is not a bill that we need to be fighting every session.
There's important things that we need to do.
Let's get this passed.
Let's protect the citizens.
Let's listen to the voice of the people and let's move forward.
Exactly.
Let's just do it and just do your duty.

(59:48):
Just do your duty.
That's all we're asking.
We're not asking for anything else.
Just honor the Constitution and do your duty.
That's right.
Well, everyone, please go to the CAG.org LACAG.org and do those calls to action thismorning.
You can do them once a day.
So maybe you just want to set a reminder on your calendar to go to the CAG every day anddo your calls to action.

(01:00:10):
Make sure that your legislators hear from you loud and clear, ah because then they willhave no excuse on how they voted.
ah Also, if you would visit us over at freedom state.us, you can support some of our uh
Some of our sponsors and affiliate partners would appreciate that.
And Chris, I know you got to be released to go run down to the Capitol.

(01:00:32):
You're probably running late as it is.
Yeah, I'm running a little bit late, but don't worry.
Party can't start till a CAG gets there.
But I do want to reiterate your uh encouragement, for everyone to subscribe, share thestate of freedom.
Communication is so important.
And the more broadly we are able to communicate and share critical information across thestate, the more informed we're going to be, the better educated we're going to be, the

(01:01:00):
more wisely we're going to vote, and ultimately the better government.
we're going to have.
So please share and subscribe to the State of Freedom and tell all your family and friendsabout it because you're not going to find a platform like this one.
I promise you.
Danielle, have a great day.
Love you and we shall meet again.
Yep, see you on Thursday morning, Chris.

(01:01:22):
Bright and early, all right.

All Episodes

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

Bookmarked by Reese's Book Club

On Purpose with Jay Shetty

Dateline NBC

.css-15opob5{left:0;position:absolute;top:0.8rem;} All Episodes

.css-14f5ked{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:2;overflow:hidden;}#301 LA’s Overdetention Problem & the Week Ahead

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

.css-r6mb8g{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:1;overflow:hidden;}Bookmarked by Reese's Book Club

On Purpose with Jay Shetty

Dateline NBC

All Episodes

#301 LA’s Overdetention Problem & the Week Ahead

Bookmarked by Reese's Book Club