Posted on 03/21/2007 1:18:41 PM PDT by Galactic Overlord-In-Chief
With Gov. Kathleen Blanco’s pass on running for reelection, a number of observers both in and out of elective office seem fixated that lobbyist John Breaux, a former Democrat senator from Louisiana, will change residency from Maryland and move it back to Louisiana. Breaux himself has encouraged such speculation by asking for an attorney general’s opinion on his citizenship status in the state. A review of both legal facts and political realities shows that Breaux and any Democrats supportive of this move are making a tremendous mistake that could cripple the state party for years to come.
Louisiana State University Dale Bennett Professor of Law John S, Baker, Jr. has argued convincingly that Breaux could not meet the Louisiana Constitution’s citizenship requirement of five years. As such, given that a challenge to his candidacy would occur days after his filing, even an expedited court hearing probably would not have the case heard prior to Labor Day. Appeals then would be filed regardless of the outcome and no doubt eventually would make its way to the Louisiana Supreme Court which, again even expedited, might rule barely three weeks before the Oct. 20 election at the earliest. And if the judiciary were to follow well-established case law, as Baker observes, Breaux has no real chance of successfully fending off the challenge.
Nor can the process begin any quicker. An attorney general’s opinion is just that and has no impact on a court’s decision. Neither can any challenge to the Constitution on this part be made in state court until there is party to be challenged, i.e. Breaux filing. Even a federal challenge, Baker notes, would be highly unlikely to work and would push the process past the election date.
Those are the legal realities, which are daunting enough. But the political impact of going through all of this will cripple a Breaux candidacy and will tarnish the reputation of state Democrats for trying to defend it, to the point that Breaux would be a significantly weakened candidate who would drag other Democrats down with him.
Understand that Breaux is the poster child for the good-old-boy network and politics as usual in the state (plus his longtime association with former governor Prisoner 03128-095). The reputation these labels have with a growing proportion of state voters is that these kinds of politicians are in it for themselves and their friends first, leaving the state ranked at the bottom of almost all significant quality of life indicators in the U.S. Better than almost all others Breaux has managed to metamorphisize away from these labels, but the events surrounding his candidacy will reverse all of that.
Already the state’s voters have been sensitized to the issue by the attempted chamber-jumping of state legislators to avoid the modified three-term limit (three consecutive terms maximum for a particular chamber seat, meaning term-limited members of one house can run for the other). Watching Breaux bend over backward in the weeks immediately prior to the election, contorting the law to extremes to make a case he qualifies to run for the office, will only fuel people’s cynicism about his motives and squarely associate him as the kind of politician that is trying to get into to office despite the letter and the spirit of the law to take advantage of the job, rather than to serve the state.
And with major Republican candidates Rep. Bobby Jindal and state Sen. Walter Boasso with a likely excess of $10 million to use during the campaign, reminders about how Breaux, like so many Louisiana politicians of the past, is trying to twist the law for political reasons will keep the focus squarely on Breaux as a corrupt politician. This doesn’t even include the pounding he would receive for having fled the state the second he was out of the Senate and how he didn’t lift a finger to help the state after the hurricane disasters (for example, picture a Boasso commercial showing the state senator as he tried to rescue people in the days after Hurricane Katrina, while the ex-senator is shown living the high life in and around his East Coast mansion and in fancy Washington restaurants).
In short, Breaux will be depicted in a saturation of the media as an opportunistic carpetbagger who doesn’t really care about the state engaged in shady legal maneuvering to get a prize that he will use to feed his million-dollar spending habits acquired as a high-paid lobbyist and to reward shady political allies and operatives. This to a state continuing to drift away from the Democrats who doesn’t really know Breaux or remember him, which hasn’t experienced a Breaux campaign in nine years, nor a serious one in 21 years, to try to convince them he does not comport to this image. It is folly to think that Breaux would not be an underdog candidate in this environment.
But let’s say for whatever reason Breaux and Democrats still think he could win despite all of this. And let’s also say that, despite tremendous legal evidence otherwise (maybe because they think they can manipulate the state judiciary?), they think there’s even a good chance a Breaux candidacy would be allowed to legally happen. The fact is it is a tremendous, ill-advised gamble on which everything could be lost.
It’s bad enough that Breaux as the Democrat standard bearer could become seen as the face of a tired, stuck-in-the-past, solution-less, perhaps even dishonest party, lose the election and drag down a lot of other Democrats with him, but the chance, even if (in their minds) it is not a large chance that he could be disqualified should alert any thinking political strategist that it is a huge risk with poor payoff. Simply, going with Breaux would be putting all their eggs in one basket that could completely scrambled weeks, or even days, before the election itself.
The whole point of Blanco removing herself from the contest was to enable Democrats to unite around a particular stronger candidate. But if that candidate himself has a non-trivial chance that he would not qualify, it is a stupid bet to go in this direction. If not allowed to run, Democrats would have no chance to find a “replacement” and the only other Democrat of consequence running, Public Service Commissioner Foster Campbell, is not the answer to the Jindal-Boasso juggernaut (indeed, Campbell would gleefully pile on against Breaux). And you can’t have a “backup” simultaneously running with Breaux, because this defeats the purpose as it would split the Democrat vote (something party insiders already worry about with Campbell).
But even if the challenge to Breaux is unsuccessful, that outcome itself dooms a Breaux candidacy. By having a judiciary warp the Constitution and law to find a way to allow Breaux to run would be the perfect demonstration of why Breaux should not be allowed to win: a corrupt system allowing in one of its own to save itself. His opponents would argue voting against Breaux would be the perfect way to demonstrate protest against this regime. So either Breaux stays on the ballot in an untenable situation, or he’s off and Democrats are left with no candidate that could compete against Jindal and Boasso.
Perhaps Breaux can be excused if he is deluded enough to think he can get elected governor in this environment. State Democrats cannot be and have lost touch with reality if they think there are not other candidates who would stand a better chance against two strong Republican foes, given the risks brought to the party by a Breaux candidacy.
What say our Louisiana experts? Most people have been saying the Breaux would win in a walk, and my own view is that most of the voters in Louisiana could care less about corruption as long as it brings home the bacon for the state.
Also, what are the chances that Louisiana judges will do anything but support the establishment, as rapidly as possible?
It would be nice to think this editorial is true, but I have my doubts.
Are there enough Oprah-Voters left in New Orleans to elect a democrat statewide?
Jindal is in.
Imagine how the Katrina mess would have worked out had Jinal been Guv?
Why would someone donate money to a Breaux campaign if there was a very real chance that he is ineligible to hold office.
Why would Breaux give up the good life in DC to move back and campaign in the Parishes of Louisiana?
Breaux isn't just any Democrat. He's very popular throughout the state. He's also social conservative and has a 100% Pro Life voting record. I would probably vote for Jindal, but would consider Breaux against a weak Republican.
when all is said and done, Breaux will be in the race and will be a formidable opponent. Anyone who believes otherwise is engaging in wishful thinking.
I know. Have it heard in the New Jersey Supreme Court where election laws do not apply to Democrats.
What a shame that would be after all the hard work Blanco has done for the party's reputation. < /sarc>
Yes, but only in the cemetaries.
LA is as LA does, as LA always has been, since the colonial times, and before.......
Because as Governor of Louisiana he can flip a Red State to Blue by being the Dems' 2008 VP candidate.
Breaux would never get picked as a running mate. The baby killers wouldn't allow it, unless they are supporting Rudy.
Oh, they will come back at election time, vote and then go back to wherever.
I think it might be a close race, but Louisiana loves their democrats and love their Cajun namesakes.
Unfortunately, a lot of people in this state would look at Jindal as being no match for Breaux and would try to draft Vitter into the governor's race, splitting the Republican vote. Breaux would get far more votes than Blanco did in her first run, and I'd be willing to bet the LA Supreme Court would waive the (State) Constitutional requirement finding some asinine technicality...i.e. Blanco giving Breaux a retroactive lifetime citizenship for his years of *honorable* service to the state in the US Congress or some such idiotic thing.
Will they? How did the mayoral turn out appear? Just curious and hopefull that there are significantly fewer slothful citizens, and by definition fewer democrats, in the state.
Now,,,Watch me catch "bro." in a LIE !!...;0)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
http://www.wafb.com/Global/story.asp?S=6259319
The Louisiana Attorney General's office disputes a report by a Washington newspaper (The Politico) that claims Breaux has asked the attorney general for a legal opinion on whether Breaux would be eligible to run for governor in Louisiana since his residence is in Maryland. Kris Wartelle, spokeswoman for Attorney General Charles Foti, says no such request has been made.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~heheheheheehe~~~~~~~~~~
Maybe they can "BUS"Breaux"Back"Home" like they did the
"Plantation Voters" bus-lift to vote for "Da'Mayor"...;0)
I doubt there is much to this. Rats break the law all the time. The courts let them get away with it. Louisiana voters aren't particularly concerned with ethics. Breaux has always been a big vote-getter there. If he runs, he wins.
I don't think Vitter would do much better than Jindal against Breaux. Vitter would probably have better appeal to northern voters because he's won't have Jindal's "redneck problem" but it may not be enough. I doubt Vitter gets in. He's already endorsed Jindal.
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.