Wasting no time

The Koch people are ready to drop in the paratroopers.

Now that the ruling has come to pass, the group plans a flood of social media, mail, email, cable television ads, op-eds and phone calls to spread the news about employees’ opportunity to cease paying union fees. Along with going door-to-door, the anti-union activists plan to visit government buildings at which public employees work.

Similarly, the Heritage people have been ready to drop in SCOTUS nominees since before Trump took office. 

As the conversation evolved, an idea emerged: What if Trump could present to the public a list of Supreme Court nominees? DeMint enthusiastically volunteered to help provide one. When he returned to Heritage’s offices, though, some senior staffers balked. One concern they raised was that it would be counterproductive for Heritage to explicitly endorse possible judicial appointees: Because the think tank was considered to the right of the Republican mainstream, its approval of candidates could make them toxic in the confirmation process. But DeMint was adamant, insisting that this was an opportunity Heritage should not pass up. The head of Heritage’s Center for Legal and Judicial Studies, John Malcolm, ultimately wrote the list in the form of a post for Heritage’s news and commentary website, The Daily Signal. By then, Trump had already singled out Heritage at a news conference, announcing that it was one of the groups he was working with on a Supreme Court list.

That's the genesis of the list he will be working with now. 

President Trump said Wednesday that Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy's replacement will come from a list of 25 possible nominees that was released by the White House in November.

Kennedy announced his retirement on Wednesday, saying he will step down effective July 31.

One of the possible nominees, Sen. Mike Lee of Utah, tells CBS News he would "of course" accept an offer to serve on the high court.

Mr. Trump released a list of 11 potential nominees after securing the Republican presidential nomination in 2016, one that was heavily influenced by the conservative Heritage Foundation. His campaign expanded the list in the fall of 2016, and it eventually grew to the list of 25 names released last year.

Trump is nutty but the oligarchs have money and they have plans. It would take an act of amazing stupidity for him to mess this up for them.

Hard headed attorneys

Believe it or not the legislature has a better than even chance to accomplish something significant this session. A package of modest criminal justice reforms could, according to the task force recommending them, reduce the state's prison population by 13 percent and save about $300 million in the process. Louisiana is frequently cited by human rights organizations for its first in the nation incarceration rate.

Unlike the governor's surely doomed tax reforms, much of this stuff can probably pass. Some of it, in fact, probably has to. Here, for example, is the context behind Dan Claitor's bill to curb life sentences without parole for juveniles which just made it out of committee this week.

The legislation is largely motivated because the state is in violation of two U.S. Supreme Court decisions.

One court ruling, Miller v. Alabama found that life without the possibility of parole for juveniles was considered cruel and unusual punishment and could only be used for the rare, incorrigible cases of juvenile convictions. A subsequent decision Montgomery v. Louisiana found that the prohibition on life sentences for juveniles should be applied retroactively. 

Another reason for optimism, the broad support for reform from conservative groups and individuals who, in the past, one would assume to hold a lock-em-all-up position. Here they all are at a recent breakfast hosted by the Kochs' organization.  The Advocate report on that event also links to a part of the recent Reilly survey of Louisiana residents itself titled. "Large Majority Favors Criminal Justice Reform."  So there's significant momentum.   The only remaining obstacle... the Louisiana District Attorneys.  We mentioned this the other day, but don't take it from us. The Kochs' people are also bewildered.

Law enforcement generally start off opposing such efforts in other states, said Mark Holden, the general counsel for Koch Industries Inc. and the featured speaker at the event. But he expressed surprise that Louisiana’s district attorneys are uniformly opposed to the revamp.

“Deep red states like Texas and South Carolina and Georgia passed it and found that it works for them,” Holden said in an interview. “You’d think that they would find comfort in the experiences in those states.”

The two brothers that head Koch Industries contribute liberally to conservative causes and have pushed criminal justice reform as a way to lower crime as well as save money for cash-strapped state governments.

When you find yourself positioned to the right of a majority of Louisiana voters, the Kochs as well as David Vitter and Tony Perkins who were also in the room that morning, maybe it's time to rethink things.

Populism theater

Bobby Jindal is standing up for the little guy against the Kochs.  Primarily he is doing this because they won't give him money.

CNN's John King, on Sunday, reported on "Inside Politics" that meetings and conferences being held by groups such as Americans for Prosperity and the Freedom Partners aren't inviting Jindal to speak but are inviting other presidential candidates. Both groups receive support from billionaire brothers Charles and David Koch, who are executives at Koch Industries and well known for wielding influence in the Republican party through their considerable finances.

"The Kochs haven't settled on one GOP prospect -- at least not yet," King reported. "But it is clear they view some candidates more favorably than others. Top aides for Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal are now complaining to friends their candidate is being excluded from these Koch-sponsored gatherings."

King goes on to comment that GOP candidates have taken to calling the competition for the Koch Brothers' attention as "the Koch primary." And, King reported Jindal's aides as complaining that the rules for that shadow primary "just aren't fair."

Conveniently enough, though, this is probably just what Bobby wants. In 2016, many GOP candidates are going to try and sell themselves as populist advocates for free enterprise which, in the conservative narrative, has been corrupted and suppressed by a Wall Street many voters (quite rightly) associate with President Obama and Hillary Clinton as much as they do with.. say.. Jeb Bush.

Here is Jindal trying out this pitch on the Sean Hannity show last week.

JINDAL: A couple of things. We're the only ones offering a detailed plan.  Every Republican has a one-liner on ObamaCare. We've got detailed plans on energy independence, on school choice, on health care, on foreign policy.  They all hire somebody to write their plans. They can borrow mine. We've actually got ideas. Plus, we've got a proven track record. Again, enough with the slick talkers. Let's elect somebody that's done something.

And, finally, we're willing to stand up to leaders in both parties. The Republican Party is not supposed to be the party of big government. Sean, we're not supposed to be the party of big business, either. On Common Core, on amnesty, on religious liberty, we've seen too many Republicans fold the tent, not fight for conservatives.

HANNITY: Facebook post from a viewer, Gus Peterson. "Are you a conservative? And will you look us in the eye and promise to remain a conservative?" I guess he wants you to look into that camera.

JINDAL: I'm a constitutional conservative. Sean, I've heard you describe yourself as a Reagan constitutional conservative. I can think of no three better words to describe my political philosophy. I'm a Reagan constitutional conservative. I will remain a Reagan constitutional conservative. It doesn't matter to what the elites D.C. think in the Republican or the Democratic Party.

Among those Jindal has seen "fold the tent and not fight for conservatives" as Jindal defines them.. David Koch. 

David Koch, the big money political donor and liberal boogeyman, has agreed to sign onto to an amicus brief supporting same-sex marriage at the Supreme Court, the Washington Free Beacon reported.

The brief he will reportedly sign in DeBoer v. Snyder, a case that could afford same-sex couples a constitutional right to marry, will host a number of other prominent conservative signatories, including retired Army Gen. Stanley McChrystal, former Reagan White House chief of staff Ken Duberstein and former Republican National Committee chairman Ken Mehlman. News of the brief was first reported Tuesday by The Washington Post.

Earlier in the year, Bobby's New York Times manifesto against gay marriage relied on this specter of big corporate bullying as a foil against which to demonstrate Bobby's moral constancy.

Some corporations have already contacted me and asked me to oppose this law. I am certain that other companies, under pressure from radical liberals, will do the same. They are free to voice their opinions, but they will not deter me. As a nation we would not compel a priest, minister or rabbi to violate his conscience and perform a same-sex wedding ceremony. But a great many Americans who are not members of the clergy feel just as called to live their faith through their businesses. That’s why we should ensure that musicians, caterers, photographers and others should be immune from government coercion on deeply held religious convictions.

Jindal also added the term "corporate welfare" to his repertoire this spring while rationalizing the contortions he put the state budgetary process through in order to maintain  Norquist-approved ideological purity. Jindal is positioning himself as the real conservative which he defines as something opposed to what "big business" and their (possibly) radical liberal allies are selling and probably corrupting you with.

We can pick apart the hypocrisies of all of this later. But that would be beside the point. Presidential campaigns are mostly theater, anyway.  The 2016 campaign is going to be a populist kind of theater, though. The candidates may be insincere but voters, on the right and on the left, are angry.

To move those votes, candidates will be looking for ways to tap into that impulse; to identify with the large number of Americans who feel left behind or ostracized in some way by the system.   If you're looking for a way to maximize your populist appeal in the GOP primary, you could do a lot worse than a "team of experts who specialize in leveraging Christian outrage" and a candidate who is publicly on the outs with the Kochs.

Bobby Jindal is not doing so bad for himself right now.

Is this all they got?

So far I confess I'm underwhelmed by Americans For Prosperity's much talked about entry into Louisiana politics.  So far all they've come up with in the ads I've seen is, "Mary Landrieu travels a lot and owns a house in Washington."  Pretty sure that's not gonna get it done.

"Collectivists"

The Kochs have some weird fantasies about stuff. They also have all the money, though, so we have to listen them.

$peech

Let the freedom flow over everything.

WASHINGTON -- The Supreme Court took another step Wednesday toward giving wealthy donors more freedom to influence federal elections.

The justices ruled 5-4, in a decision written by Chief Justice John Roberts, that limits on the total amount of money donors can give to all candidates, committees and political parties are unconstitutional. The decision frees the nation's wealthiest donors to have greater influence in federal elections.

In a related matter

The next time U.S. Sen. Mary Landrieu gets down over all those television ads attacking her for supporting President Barack Obama’s health care reform law, at least she can take comfort in the fact that she’s not Kay Hagan.

Hagan is Landrieu’s North Carolina counterpart, a Democrat who backed the Affordable Care Act who’s now facing the fight of her life to win another six-year term. And like Landrieu, Hagan has landed in the crosshairs of Americans For Prosperity, the Koch brothers-backed advocacy group that’s spending this election season pummeling ACA backers on the air.

But that $2.9 million AFP’s spent so far on anti-Landrieu ads? That’s relatively small potatoes compared to the whopping $7 million the group has invested in its effort to unseat Hagan, or 44 percent of the $16 million AFP has spent so far to knock out ACA supporters in the Senate, according to the Washington Post.

In other words, not only can it get worse for people on the wrong side of the oligarchy, thanks to this decision, it most likely will.  

Koch head

Senator Vitter bravely stands up for America.

“I think the Koch brothers are two of the most patriotic Americans in the history of the Earth. […]

“God bless the Koch brothers. They’re fighting for our freedoms.”

Not sure if the Louisiana office of AFP has chosen a Gubernatorial pony yet but Vitter can't have hurt his chances in the pageant.   There will be plenty of time to worry about that, though.  In the meantime, Vitter has other clients to worry about.

Anadarko Petroleum Corp. (APC) officials urged BP Plc to drill deeper into the Gulf of Mexico well that caused the worst offshore oil spill in U.S. history even after BP warned that doing so would be unsafe.

A BP executive and a geologist working on the Macondo well rejected Anadarko’s urging to deepen the well, according to e-mails sent the week before the April 2010 deep-sea blowout. BP officials said in the e-mails, unsealed this month in lawsuits over the spill, that the well’s condition “provided for little to no margin to continue drilling” safely.

Justice Department lawyers are asking U.S. District Judge Carl Barbier in New Orleans to consider Anadarko’s e-mails as proof the Texas-based oil explorer was involved in day-to-day monitoring and decisions at the Macondo well when he calculates a potentially multibillion-dollar pollution fine against the drilling partners.

Recall that Vitter has been working to limit Anadarko's liability for the Macondo disaster for some time now. While it's difficult to determine whether Anadarko, as a corporate person, is among "the most patriotic Americans in the history of the Earth,"  one can't help but assume that advocacy of drilling deeper without regard for safety is a plus in Vitter's book.

Sometimes there really are Koch brothers under your bed

Some might remember this controversial article in Antigravity Magazine back in the spring where Jules Bentley referenced some interesting ties between Koch-funded lobbying firms and think-tanks and various movements to lighten food truck regulations in municipalities across the country.

Looking at the board and staff of the Keep Food Legal group, the major thread tying most of them together is Reason Magazine, the most frequent publisher of Linnekin and other KFL members’ screeds against governmental food-safety regulations. Nick Gillespie, the editor of  Reason, sits on Keep Food Legal’s board. Reason is the mouthpiece of another far-right think-tank, the Milton Friedman-endorsed Reason Foundation, whose particular mania is privatization: the corporate, for-profit takeover of services once provided by government. Of course, Reason is Koch-funded as well and even has one of the Koch brothers as a trustee.

Although Keep Food Legal attempts to put a more fun face on their lobbying efforts than the climate-change-denying wingnuttery of the Reason Foundation, its initiatives include “Opt Out of School Lunch,” which advocates that school lunch programs be discontinued—”Stop fighting for the USDA and the federal government to provide better food,” their website says.

Keep Food Legal, Reason Foundation, The Institute for Justice: these are the Koch-funded anti-regulatory madmen that the New Orleans Food Truck Coalition is in bed with: rich dudes who want to shut down school lunch programs, wingnuts tied to the Cato Institute and ALEC. In fact, at that 2012 Beverage Museum seminar, Linnekin’s presentation not only criticized the “discriminatory regulations” food trucks face but, ALEC-like, provided “a framework within which to consider model food truck regulations.” These are the people who want to rewrite New Orleans’ laws, and this is where the momentum to do so originates.

Whatever your feelings are about food trucks (I like them) the fact that the Kochs would direct their efforts at seemingly minor questions in far flung localities should have at least raised an eyebrow.  A lot of people thought it was ridiculous to even mention.

But then there's this.

Tuesday’s race here is not the only one that has drawn the interest of Americans for Prosperity, which was founded by Charles and David Koch. Local chapters have been involved in property tax fights in Kansas, Ohio and Texas, the group says. 

In January, the group successfully fought an increase in a food and beverage tax in Fremont, Neb. And last spring, it opposed a tax increase in Gahanna, in central Ohio. Voters rejected the tax measure in May, but the City Council has put it back on Tuesday’s ballot. 

Tim Phillips, the national president of Americans for Prosperity, said the organization could have a real effect on local races, where it does not have to deal with all the Washington special interests. 

The main reason “we fight local issue battles is because they result in good policy outcomes, generally promoting economic freedom via less taxes, less government spending,” he said.

When you have all the money, you really can buy all the politics.