tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5976758.post1760806814937545220..comments2024-01-27T05:19:03.060-06:00Comments on Library Chronicles: David Duke: RepublicanUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5976758.post-50627667717663564792015-01-19T22:01:28.148-06:002015-01-19T22:01:28.148-06:00Dude, there's so much to criticize Roemer for ...Dude, there's so much to criticize Roemer for that you needn't imply bullshit about him. You might think Roemer was just saying empty words when he spoke about the environment, but big business didn't. How do you think we got the Duke/Edwards runoff. LABI refused to endorse a sitting Republican, but it didn't actively endorse anybody else. The Louisiana Chemical Association actively campaigned against. Hell, just one polluter, Jack Kent of Marine Shale, spent a half million (in 1990 dollars) to run a last minute ad blitz against him. The states big polluters didn't think Roemer was just paying lip to protecting the environment, and it kept him out of a runoff.<br /><br /><br />Roemer's critics could easily come up with other reasons why he wasn't re-elected, but I doubt any of those reasons would have kept him from barely making a run-off if the petrochemical industry hadn't decided it wanted Roemer out.bayoustjohndavidnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5976758.post-84100504117864882712015-01-19T06:40:56.977-06:002015-01-19T06:40:56.977-06:00You got noticed
http://bobmannblog.com/2015/01/1...You got noticed <br /><br />http://bobmannblog.com/2015/01/18/bobby-jindal-and-david-duke-use-the-same-words-to-describe-louisianas-working-poor/<br />Claynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5976758.post-54339597118279098482015-01-18T15:45:58.916-06:002015-01-18T15:45:58.916-06:00Plus, I guess it never hurts when the guv's fa...Plus, I guess it never hurts when the guv's family has a financial interest in the company that was doing the Fl drug tests.<br /><br />However, there may be another reason why Gov. Scott appears <br />determined to pursue policies that funnel taxpayer money through the <br />health care industry. Solantic, the chain of health care clinics <br />performing much of Florida’s drug testing, was co-founded by Rick Scott. <br /><br /> In 2011, Scott transferred his shares in Solantic to his wife,<br /> so while not directly linked to the company, the Scott household still <br />stands to personally benefit financially from the drug-testing law, <br />raising serious questions of a conflict of interest.<br /><br />http://www.allvoices.com/article/16261762Nolaresidentnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5976758.post-12886802762379312572015-01-18T15:37:06.252-06:002015-01-18T15:37:06.252-06:00Note to Boustany and Angela on drug testing of &qu...Note to Boustany and Angela on drug testing of "welfare" recipients:<br /><br />From July through October in Florida — the four months when testing took<br /> place before Judge Scriven’s order — 2.6 percent of the state’s cash <br />assistance applicants failed the drug test, or 108 of 4,086, according <br />to the figures from the state obtained by the group. The most common <br />reason was marijuana use. An additional 40 people canceled the tests without taking them. <br /><br />Because the Florida law requires that applicants who pass the test be <br />reimbursed for the cost, an average of $30, the cost to the state was <br />$118,140. This is more than would have been paid out in benefits to the <br />people who failed the test, Mr. Newton said. <br /><br />As a result, the testing cost the government an extra $45,780, he said. <br /><br />And the testing did not have the effect some predicted. An internal <br />document about Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, or TANF, <br />caseloads stated that the drug testing policy, at least from July <br />through September, did not lead to fewer cases.<br /><br />http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/18/us/no-savings-found-in-florida-welfare-drug-tests.html?_r=0Nolaresidentnoreply@blogger.com