Defeat SB543

This proposed legislation will undermine the Jindal ethics reforms and it will cause serious public embarrassment to the legislature in the near term future.

1) Legislative continuances have a financial value to all legislative-attorneys. Please make sure that all attorneys are in compliance with the ethics rules of this state.

2) The expansion of the legislative continuances perk is hidden because they chose to erase all existing legislation and rewrite it. It takes close scrutiny to see the key changes that expand this policy.

3) This is the second major bill in as many years where the Senate has failed to do its job and has passed unanimously a horrendous bill. Last year, this committee stopped and modified the Uniform Child Abduction Prevention act** before it did serious harm to the citizens of Louisiana. I ask that you again stand tall and stop a very bad bill.

1) As written, it seriously expands the court black out days caused by legislative exemptions.

Under current law, legislative activities out of the regular session {4163 A(3)(b) lines 20-25 on page 2 of the bill} are only currently granted 'reasonable period of time' delays {4163 lines 11-14 of page 3} the mandatory 60 day delay only applying to some type of legislative session or constitutional convention (A)(3)(a), (c), and (d) {4163 lines 7-10 of page 3}

Under the new law, legislative activities out of the regular session are now under section 4163 C(3) {lines 17-22 of page 4}. The delay for these activies are now given a mandatory 60 day continuance per 4163 E(2) {lines 5-8 of page 5}.

As a result, any attorney-legislator involved in bi-monthly (every 60 days) standing committee meetings, whether they attend or not, is being granted a mandatory 60 day continuance which in practice grants them a mandatory exemption from any court action for the duration of their term in office.

No other state, see analysis in word document, grants a 60 day extension for committee activities. Their laws either only except the day of the committee meeting or 1 day before and 1 day after the committee meeting.

If you consider passing this bill, at least amend (C)(3) from sixty days down to ONE day. 5 (2) If the grounds for the motion are pursuant to Paragraph (C)(3), the 6 continuance or extension shall be granted for a period of not less than ONE day 7 from the date the activities giving rise to the need for the continuance or 8 extension cease.

2) As written, this bill and existing law violates the separation of powers doctrine. The Wisconsin Appeals court in 2003 in the case of State v. Chvala ruled that the Wisconsin law was unconstitutional unless it provided the judges the discetion to set the case for trial in the interest of justice. Chvala was a Wisconsin Legislator who was charged with misconduct in public office and violation of campaign finance statutes. See the references in the word document.

3) As written, this bill and existing law violates the due process clauses of the Fourteenth amendment to the U.S. Constitution and Article I, Sections 13 (open courts) and 19 (due process) of the Texas Constitution. {please find the related Louisiana Constitution laws} exemption for cases where the non-movant would be irreparably harmed or injury of a substantial right as decided by the Texas courts in Waites v. Sondock. In Waites, the mother proved that she would suffer harm if the court delayed the enforcement of her child support order. {Yes, we are for fair play - we only fight the abusive application of child support laws}

Louisiana laws have no built in protections allowing the courts the discretion to refuse a continuance asked for in bad faith simply to delay a case.

Please amend the law from being 'peremptory' (C.C.P. 1602) to being 'discretionary' (C.C.P. 1601) for certain cases that are time sensitive or where substantial harm may occur if the delay is granted. Any case involving a protective orders. Any case involving a violent felony - especially revoking parole. Any case involving child support.

A. A member of the legislature and a legislative employee shall have DISCRETIONARY grounds for continuance or extension of a criminal case, civil case, or administrative proceeding as provided below. The continuance or extension shall be sought by written motion specifically alleging these grounds.

B. The DISCRETIONARY grounds for continuance or extension is available to a member of the legislature, the clerk of the House of Representatives, the secretary of the Senate, and an employee of the House of Representatives, the Senate, or of the Legislative Bureau when such person is serving or employed full-time during a session of the legislature.

C. The DISCRETIONARY grounds for continuance or extension is available if the presence, participation, or involvement in any capacity of such person is required in any criminal case, civil case, or administrative proceeding, including, but not limited to, pre-trial and post-trial proceedings, discovery, and other deadlines, during:

This amendment is a bit broader than I intend as it applies to all case. It should just apply to specific cases mentioned above. Also see the Texas law - they make the delay discretionary in civil cases where the attorney signed on 30 days before trial and in criminal cases 15 days before trial.

4) Amend the bill to require that all motions for legislative continuances be filed with the Louisiana ethics baord. For example, amend 1463 E to include: {burden the courts or burden the attorney? lets burden the courts, they are neutral and have no basis for not submitting to this requirement !} E. Within seventy-two hours of the filing of a motion for a legislative continuance or extension, the court or agency shall grant the continuance or extension ex-parte as follows:

(1) The court shall file a copy of the motion for legislative continuance with the Louisiana Ethics Board.

Texas has already gone through the pain of revising their laws because of the abuses of certain legislators (see attached word documents). Let's learn from their mistakes.

5) Amend the bill to require all motions to require in the affidavit that the attorney will actively participate in the case and that they did not take the case solely for the purposes of delay.

D. A motion for legislative continuance or extension filed by a legislative employee shall be accompanied by an affidavit, stating the grounds for the continuance. The affidavit is proof of the necessity for a continuance. The affidavit need not be corroborated. the affidavit must contain a declaration that it is the attorney's intention to participate actively in the preparation or presentation of the case and that the attorney has not taken the case for the purpose of obtaining a continuance under this section. verifying such employment or service, executed by the presiding officer or the clerk or secretary of the respective house.

6) Any other amendments that you see fit to add after reading the laws from the other states.

* Actually, Since the current law is also seriously flawed I would prefer that you seriously amend the law to make reforms in the correct direction. However, since legislating on the fly is never a good idea - since one small mistake can undermine the best of intentions - the best option would be to send it to an LSLI committee to ensure that the revisions are properly thought through.

** Louisiana was the first state to modify the UCAPA law. It passed in at least 7 other states with hardly a murmur of opposition. It was only when it got to Louisiana's Civil Law and Procedure committee that it was actually reviewed. Thank you very much Harold Murry, atty, for appearing to testify at the last minute. And also thanks to Rep. Shirely Bowler - a NON-attorney who was instrumental in getting the changes made. So the question is, what happened to all of the other attorneys? Were they asleep? bribed? corrupt? negligent? This bill allowed people to be punished because they had family that lived in other states... because they had 'cultural or emotional' ties to another state... because they fulfilled a parental obligation to pick up their children's birth certificates, medical records or school records.. --------------------------------------------------- A VERY rough transcript of the Civil Law and Procedure hearing

This is simply, as an attorney, I can't stand messy law, so this makes no real substantive changes because over the years things have been added put in places in this particular it was cumbersome to read we basically rewrote existing law

59:39 um under current law you are entitled to a legislative continuance for 15 days before a session to 15 days after a session as well as committee meetings um there was some issue as to when you had to file that legislative continuance, the only thing that I changed the current law we were required to file a motion for legislative continuance within 5 days of the legislative session which is rather silly because you know when session is April 30th why make me wait until April 25th to file the motion for continuance why make our parties wait when we know months in advance um I think a year in advance actually when the session is going to be so I eliminated that five day window cause I thought it was rather silly, now you can file the motion for continuance at any time but you are still entitled to a legislative continuance 15 days before the session starts and 15 days after the session is over.

1:00 One of the staff members staff attorneys here had made a good suggestion to me under current law the judges have 72 hours after which to rule, her point was that if you file for a continuance a day before the hearing that enables the judge not to grant it until after the hearing so she suggested since I am fixing this, why don't I fix that also, I see her talking over there, I don't know if she has the language quite worked out yet, I tried to wait as long as I could

1:91 Edwards Senator Quinn if we took I am looking at page 2 paragraph C which will be instead of within 5 calendar days or within 4 calendar days we said no later than that would I think take care of that that way you don't have the option of filing one day before the hearing you have to file 4 days or more

1:02 Not a bad thought, My only concern with that is committee meetings. I think there is probably a minimum of do you know is there any attorney on staff that knows ..

1:02 Edwards: I'm being told committee days in the interim you have ten days notice and the shortest amount of time to call a special session is 4 days.

Quinn My only other concern is to make sure there is no other time that we are are entitled to a legislative continuance except session extraordianry session and committee hearings... constitutional convention.. which would also have to be called 5 days in advance. I like your suggestion representative Edwards saying at a minimum within

Quinn no later than, if you want to offer that ammendment that's wonderful. And that really takes care of all of our concerns.

1:03 Edwards I want to offer one other amendment but the entire paragraph I was reading from okay so that paragraph would be reinserted as f1 ...Roberts got it Senator Quinn.

1:-03 Okay, what we are going to do, if you first look on page 4 at the bottom we have section E we are going to make that E1 and then if you go back to page 2 the language between lines 9 and 12 thats going to be E2 but it is going to read as follows "... see text..."

Edwards When the court has to issue it right? The deadlines to file the motion should come before when the court orders.

1:08 The 60 day also applies to nonsession events, and I was just going to ask you why the 60 days When we are out of a session is there a need for something shorter

1:08 Quinn You are talking about the 15 day before and the 15 day after oh no, where are you saying 60 days

1:08 Abramson Page 5 line 5 it says " reads line" and C3 is basically when we are not in session but we might have a committee hearing or some other obligation which we haven't we can only do one thing at a time but this says the extension shall be for a period not less than sixty days and I just wanted to ask a question about that

1:08 That's a good point um and I have confirmed now twice today that this is when we are entitled to a legislative continuance and by the way its not just legislators its staff non attorney staff too I was surprised to learn but at any rate sessions both regular and extraordinary constintuational conventions so the only other time left is commitee meeting and I think you make a good point because in reality that was actually pushed to its extreme we would never have to go to court for anything which is not the intended consequence of this bill we don't need sixty days after every committee meetings so if you want to, if we want to play with that, now is the time and I am happy to take five minutes and see what we can do.

1:09 Quinn 5 days, 10 days after a committee meeting, ... I mean, I know it takes time to prepare for the committee meeting which takes my time away from I need time after the committee meeting to prepare for going to court whatever you think is an appropriate time frame.

1:09 Abramson ... I don't know if I have a particular time frame I do htink 60 days particularly when we are out of session uh might be a little excessive at times. I don't know what it might be, a week, 5 days, 10 days, I don't have a proposed time period I am just suggesting we might shorten it

1:10 Rep Edwards Senator Quinn, and I think this gets backto what Rep Abrhamson was talking about it appears to me that we could just omit that paragraph that runs through line 5 to 8 on page 5 because the only usage you are trying to pick up there that is not already provided for in the paragraph above it it appears to me are thos interim committee meetings.

1:10 Sen Quinn Let me think about that, but I would like cause I always found that confusing as well and our goal was to try to make this less confusing because it says somewhere else 15 days before the session 15 days after if we delete that though we need to provide for something for the committee it would be 15 days days before and 15 days after would be the continuance for a committee hearing and maybe that is appropriate.

1:11 Rep Edwards I would just ask you to look at I thought maybe we could delete that paragraphbut if we do that there is nothing to cover that interim committee meeting.

1:11 Sen Quinn Not to my knowledge. Let me look. ... no there is no time period at all so that is why that is there I think 60 days is excessive ... maybe ten days?

1:12 Rep Abramson We were just discussing that the current law is that you get a continuance for the day that you have a comitment for a committee out of session but there is nothing that gives you more than those particular days that day or those days that you are currently tied up in. I guess the suggestion was made that we just take out paragraph 2 all together.

1:12 Sen Quinn Tell me where, I am sorry I want to make sure I am reading this correctly.... during, I see.

1:13 Rep Abramson There is a concern that some of theses committee meetings require travel some legislators may take a day or part of a day to get home so we might be in a position to have something scheduled the very next day; to me a couple days; why don't we say three, we could change sixty days to three days.

1:15 Sen Quinn Now is the time, I learned a long time to get my bill through I want to get my bill through, I want to be intellectually honest, now is the time to clean this bill up. The only thing that has come to my mind is regarding agency proceedings and I want to talk about that now because I would rather do that now than on the floor, I want to get a clean bill to the floor and non-controversial, for example, Board of Ethics comes to mind, particularly dealing with legislatures they oversee us when they have a problem and they are asking for all types of they ask for some very intensive information and very time consuming information and we know what our schedule is like here from sunup to sundown and I want to take a moment to make sure we are clear on what agencies and proceedings mean, what is an agency? and I realize this is my bill but this is something that I have not fleshed out and I welcome committee members input because it does concern me that it has never been tested but it is certainly problematic. I think we are all happy to cooperate with any agency particularly the Board of Ethics but it is very very difficult to do so when we are in the middle of session if not impossible ... is there a definition of agency... I am happy with leaving it the way it is and if we want to test it individually with those agencies when the time comes um unless somebody has a burning desire to place a definition of agency in this bill at the moment

Her concern and I concern is that we would not want the board of ethics to think that they were exempt from this, I can only tell you from personal experience that they do not think that they are subject to this.

You seem very surprised to learn that this even existed um its created some real hardships so lets just leave it the way it is and we will just test it on an individual basis the only problem with testing on an individual basis they then believe that you have something to hide and you are being uncooperative with them when you are not you are just trying to do your job here at the legislature and make them happy at the same time and it is a nearly impossible task I can tell you that.

That was my understanding, pretty much any agency that would have subpoena powers

1:18 Quinn They have subpoena powers directly. I want you to know because we had that big argument over Inspector General subpoena power that the board of ethics can issue a subpoena

1:19 Quinn So you are suggesting that if you receive a subpoena from the Board of Ethics you can invoke this particular um law and ask for a continuance until after session.

1:19 Burns? I was told by staff and I was thinking on page 4 of line 10 the bill does cover and it is based on previous law it does cover civil case, criminal case and administrative proceeding I ... technical amdenment that i

The ethics reforms are still shaky in Louisiana. Help them take better root.

We have two days to convince the House to further revise this bill - SB543.

Note at the end of the Senators testimony, she wants it to be made very clear that she doesn't have to answer to the BOARD OF ETHICS until after the session is long since over.

If her bill had passed unmodified, as a committee chairperson, she is on the monthly LSLI committee. So she would have been able to defer answering to them for as long as she was in office. I would look for her to try to get that provision added back in on the house floor.

The exceptions put into the law in other states need to be put into this law here. Texas in particular has gone through this fire in 1999 and in 2003. They put a number of limitations on their law because of the abuse of legislators.

1) All legislative continuances have to be reported to the Board of Ethics within 3 days of filing.

2) An affidavit must be signed stating that they intend to actually work on the case.

3) There are limitations about signing onto cases at the last minute. within 30 days for civil cases and 15 days for criminal the delays are discretionary with the court.

4) Where life or substantive rights are involved, the delays are discretionary with the court.

examples are: .. enforcement of child support. .. obtaining protective orders. etc.

Thank you in advance. Your assistance in getting the word out and getting this law fixed is appreciated.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.