WDSU NEWS HOT SEAT. I’M TRAVERS MACKEL TONIGHT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT THE LOUISIANA LEGISLATIVE SESSION FOR 2024. THERE ARE SEVERAL WEEKS IN. A LOT HAS HAPPENED EARLY. JOINING US FROM THE PUBLIC AFFAIRS RESEARCH COUNCIL OF LOUISIANA. BETTER KNOWN AS PA, AS THEIR PRESIDENT AND CEO, STEPHEN PROCOPIO, WHO IS IN BATON ROUGE. STEPHEN, THANKS FOR JOINING US. ABSOLUTELY. ANYTIME. SO LET’S JUST JUMP RIGHT INTO IT. A CONTROVERSIAL BILL WAS FILED. LET ME BRING THIS UP. THIS WEEK WAS THE LAST WEEK FOR LAWMAKERS TO ACTUALLY FILE BILLS TO BE HEARD DURING THE SESSION. AND AT THE 11TH HOUR, THERE WAS A BILL THAT WAS FILED THAT WOULD ESSENTIALLY MAKE IT MORE DIFFICULT FOR NOT JUST MEMBERS OF THE MEDIA OR ADVOCACY RESEARCH GROUPS LIKE YOU ALL, BUT THE PUBLIC TO GET PUBLIC RECORDS FROM GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS. IT WAS A RED FLAG FOR A LOT OF PEOPLE GOING, IT SEEMS LIKE THIS IS A BILL DESIGNED TO KEEP WHAT HAPPENS IN GOVERNMENT SHROUDED IN SECRECY IS THAT SOMEWHAT CORRECT? A DECENT INTERPRETATION OF THE BILL THAT WAS FILED BY SENATOR HEATHER CLOUD FROM THE VILLE PLATTE AREA? YEAH, WE’RE TALKING ABOUT SENATOR CLOUD’S BILL. UH, YOU KNOW, TWO THINGS. UH, IT IS, UH, AS WRITTEN, VERY BROAD. IT DOESN’T, FOR EXAMPLE, JUST AFFECT THE GOVERNOR’S OFFICE, UH, FROM FROM WHAT WE’VE HEARD FROM ATTORNEYS, IT WOULD AFFECT ALL PUBLIC RECORDS AT ALL LEVELS OF GOVERNMENT, INCLUDING LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOARDS, COMMISSIONS, EVERYTHING. SO THAT’S REALLY BROAD TO BEGIN WITH. AND THEN THE LANGUAGE ITSELF IS VERY BROAD. UH, THERE’S VERY THINGS THAT THEN WOULDN’T BE HIDDEN, UH, FROM CITIZENS. SO I. WANT TO BE CLEAR, I HAVEN’T TALKED TO SENATOR CLOUD. THIS PERSONALLY. I DON’T KNOW THAT THAT WAS HER INTENTION. I ASSUME IT IS NOT. BUT AS WRITTEN CURRENTLY. YEAH, THIS IS THIS IS VERY PROBLEMATIC. THIS SHOULD RAISE ALARM BELL. AND WHY IS IT PROBLEMATIC? I MEAN, LOOK, IS IT BASICALLY SIMPLE THAT THIS WOULD SHROUD AND SEAL OFF THE PUBLIC OR THE MEDIA FROM SEEING GOVERNMENT EMAILS, GOVERNMENT TEXT MESSAGES, GOVERNMENT RECORDS THAT SHOULD BE OPEN TO THE PUBLIC FROM LAWMAKERS WHO ARE DOING BUSINESS ON OUR BEHALF. YEAH, THAT’S EXACTLY RIGHT. RIGHT. I MEAN, THERE THERE, OUR, UH, ON OUR BEHALF, UH, AND SO THEY SHOULD SHARE THEIR WORK, UH, UM, IN TERMS OF WHAT THEY’RE TRYING TO DO, UH, YOU KNOW, THERE ARE EXCEPTIONS FOR THESE THINGS, LIKE PUBLIC SAFETY, IF THERE’S A, YOU KNOW, A SAFETY REASON OR YOU’RE WORRIED ABOUT THE GOVERNOR IS WORRIED ABOUT HIS FAMILY, THERE ARE REASONS THERE AND PLENTY OF EXCEPTIONS. THIS THIS WOULD GET RID OF ALL THE EXCEPTIONS IS BASICALLY, HEY, YOU CAN’T DO ANYTHING. I MEAN, YOU CAN MAYBE GET SOME DOCUMENTS, LIKE RECEIPTS OR FINALIZED CONTRACTS. I MEAN, I DON’T SAY IT’S COMPLETELY EMPTY, BUT IT WOULD BE A SWEEPING REDUCTION. TO WHAT CITIZENS HAVE ACCESS TO. AND IT’S SO SWEEPING, I CANNOT THIS WAS INTENTIONED. YEAH. DOES ANY OTHER STATE DO ANYTHING LIKE THIS OR WOULD LOUISIANA, IF THIS PASSES, WHICH WE’LL GET TO THAT IN A SECOND. IF THIS COULD POSSIBLY EVEN COME OUT OF THE SENATE AND PASS. BUT DOES ANY OTHER STATE DO ANYTHING LIKE THIS AND HAVE BILLS PROPOSED WHERE THEY BASICALLY HIDE EVERYTHING THE GOVERNMENT IS DOING? WELL, I CAN’T TELL WHAT OTHER STATES PROPOSE. PROBABLY SOME PEOPLE PROPOSE STUFF, BUT NO, NO STATE HAS ANYTHING QUITE THIS SWEEPING. UH, IT’S IT’S IT’S IT’S AN ORDER OF MAGNITUDE WORSE THAN ANYTHING I’VE SEEN. NOW, THAT SAID, I. ASSUME THAT THIS IS GOING TO GET CHANGED AND WE’LL HAVE SOME DISCUSSIONS OF THIS AS WELL. SO I, I AM ON THE ONE HAND, VERY WORRIED ABOUT THE BILL. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE BILL IS SO FAR BEYOND WHAT WE WOULD REALLY SEE THAT I’M ACTUALLY NOT THAT WORRIED. I ASSUME, UH, THAT THIS IS GOING TO GET CHANGED. ALL RIGHT. LET’S TALK ABOUT ANOTHER TOPIC RIGHT NOW. THERE ARE SO MANY BOARDS ACROSS THE STATE OF LOUISIANA, BUT BILLS HAVE BEEN FILED ESSENTIALLY TO GIVE THE GOVERNOR MORE CONTROL OVER WHO’S ON THESE BOARDS AND HOW THESE BOARDS OPERATE. WHAT IS WHAT IS PA’S THOUGHTS ON THAT? BECAUSE THIS IS ANOTHER ONE THAT REALLY ZONES IN AND CENTERS IN, ON, ON ALL THESE BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS THAT PLAY A BIG ROLE IN WHAT PEOPLE DO ON A DAY TO DAY BASIS ACROSS THE STATE. A LOT OF DIFFERENT BOARDS, COMMISSIONS, BILLS, UM, AND WE’VE ALREADY SEEN WITH THE PUBLIC DEFENDERS BOARDS THAT’S ESSENTIALLY BEING CONSOLIDATED. AND THE GOVERNOR HAS MUCH MORE CONTROL OVER IT. UM, THERE’S BOARDS TO AFFECT. UH, THE GOVERNOR ESSENTIALLY PICKS THE HEAD OF THE HIGHER EDUCATION BOARDS. UH, AND THEN THERE’S ANOTHER BILL THAT WOULD MAKE HIM PICK THE CHAIR OF ALMOST ALL BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS. UM, AND, AND ON ITS FACE, IT SOUNDS, UM, LIKE A MASSIVE POWER GRAB. I DO THINK THERE ARE SOME NUANCE THERE. THE GOVERNOR GETS TO PICK MOST OF THE MEMBERS OF ALL THESE BOARDS ANYWAY, OR ON THE HIGHER EDUCATION BOARDS. HE WILL EVENTUALLY GET TO PICK ALL THE MEMBERS. IT’S IT’S STAGGERED, SO I CAN SEE AN ARGUMENT SAYS, LOOK, IF THE GOVERNOR’S GONNA BE IN CHARGE, HE SHOULD BE IN CHARGE. UM, I LIKE IT, PARTICULARLY ON THE HIGHER EDUCATION BOARDS, THAT THEY’RE STAGGERED BECAUSE THAT MEANS THERE’S SOME CONTINUITY OF PREVIOUS, UM, YOU KNOW, INITIATIVES, SOME BOARD MEMBERS OVER TIME. SO I DO THINK THERE’S SOME JUSTIFICATION, UM, ON WHAT HE’S TRYING TO DO OR AT LEAST IT’S GOING TO BE MORE OBVIOUS THAT HE’S IN CHARGE OF EVERYTHING. UH, ON THE OTHER HAND, UH, I DO LIKE STAGGERED BOARDS, BUT THERE’S ALSO TWO PARTICULAR BOARDS THAT I AM WORRIED ABOUT. UH, AND THAT IS THE CIVIL SERVICE, UH, BOARD, STATE CIVIL SERVICE AND THE ETHICS BOARD. THOSE ARE CHOSEN BY INDEPENDENT, UH, COLLEGES, OR AT LEAST THE NOMINEES ARE SET FORTH. THERE’S A SELECTION PROCESS THAT’S TRYING TO REMOVE POLITICS FROM THOSE TWO PARTICULAR BOARDS. UH, YOU CAN’T HAVE THE GOVERNOR IN CHARGE OF CIVIL SERVICE OR ETHICS BECAUSE THOSE ARE PEOPLE THAT THEY MIGHT HAVE TO. YOU KNOW, UH, CALL TO TASK IF THEY ARE VIOLATING ETHICS LAW OR IF THERE’S ISSUES WITH HOW THE ADMINISTRATION IS HANDLING CIVIL SERVICE RULES. SO THOSE IN PARTICULAR WORRY ME. THE OTHER ONES, I CAN SEE ARGUMENTS ON BOTH SIDES. I AM A LITTLE WORRIED ABOUT BEING A POWER GRAB. BUT ON THE OTHER HAND, TO SOME DEGREE, UH, IF HE’S IF HE’S ALREADY IN CHARGE OF THE BOARDS, I CAN, I CAN I CAN KIND OF BUY THE ARGUMENT. BUT ON THOSE TWO WHERE HE IS NOT IN CHARGE OF THE BOARDS, UH, I DO HAVE SOME, SOME PROBLEMS WITH THOSE. THOSE ARE SUPPOSED TO BE AS APOLITICAL AS POSSIBLE. IS JEFF LANDRIEU THE FIRST GOVERNOR TO TRY TO DO THIS? I KNOW WHEN JINDAL TOOK OFFICE BACK IN JANUARY OF OH EIGHT, IT SEEMED LIKE HE TRIED TO MAKE POWER MOVES OR POWER GRABS. BUT AS JEFF LANDRIEU REALLY THE FIRST GOVERNOR IN IN OUR LIFETIME THAT’S REALLY ZONED IN ON THESE BOARDS AND TRIED TO DO SOMETHING LIKE THIS, UM, AS MORE AND MORE HISTORICAL QUESTION. AND SO I’D HATE TO ANSWER YOU KNOW, WITH TOO MUCH SPECIFICITY. I DOUBT IT THAT WAY. I MEAN, THAT’S KIND OF WHAT GOVERNORS DO. UH, AND, YOU KNOW, EVERY GOVERNOR WANTS TO MAKE BIG CHANGES. SO I DON’T WANT TO NECESSARILY SINGLE HIM OUT ABOVE ANY OTHER GOVERNOR. UH, THAT DOESN’T MEAN IT’S ACCEPTABLE. UH, IT DOESN’T MEAN. YOU AUTOMATICALLY DO IT. BUT, YOU KNOW, I CAN’T BLAME A GOVERNOR OR A LEGISLATOR FOR TRYING TO STRENGTHEN THEIR BRANCH OF GOVERNMENT THAT SAID, PARTICULARLY WITH SOME OF THESE THINGS THAT AFFECT THESE, A POLITICAL OR LESS POLITICAL BOARDS, UH, CIVIL SERVICE AND ETHICS. I FIND THEM PROBLEMATIC. ALL RIGHT. THIRD AND FINAL TOPIC. WE APPRECIATE YOUR TIME. CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, CHANGING THE STATE CONSTITUTION. UH, THE GOVERNOR WANTS IT DONE. HE WANTS TO GO TO VOTERS BY NOVEMBER. IT DOES SEEM LIKE HE’S GOT THE PEDAL TO THE METAL FOR THIS TO GET DONE. SOME LAWMAKERS HAVE EVEN BALKED ABOUT THE TIMING OF TRYING TO GET THIS DONE SO QUICKLY. FIRST OFF, IN A NUTSHELL, FOR PEOPLE WHO ARE WATCHING, EXPLAIN WHAT A CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION IS IN LAYMAN’S TERMS BECAUSE THIS IS A REALLY BIG DEAL THAT SOME PEOPLE MAY NOT REALIZE THE EXTENT OF THE ENORMITY OF IT. YEAH. SO THE CONSTITUTION IS OUR IS OUR FUNDAMENTAL DOCUMENT, OR AS IT SHOULD BE, OUR FUNDAMENTAL DOCUMENT THAT SETS UP THE RULES FOR GOVERNMENT, SUPPOSED TO RUN. UM, AND SO A CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION IS ONE OF A COUPLE OF DIFFERENT WAYS OF CHANGING IT. YOU HAVE AMENDMENTS AND WE HAVE AMENDMENTS EVERY YEAR, UH, THAT SORT OF TWEAK THE CONSTITUTION AND VOTERS HAVE TO VOTE ON THAT. A CONVENTION WOULD ALLOW DELEGATES TO COME IN AND IN WHOLECLOTH THEY CAN JUST WRITE A NEW CONSTITUTION. UM, AND, OR THEY CAN CHANGE THE YOU KNOW, THE CURRENT ONE SIGNIFICANTLY. AND THEN THAT WOULD GO TO THE VOTERS FOR A VOTE. THERE WILL ALWAYS BE A THE VOTERS WILL HAVE FINAL SAY, SAY, TWO THIRDS VOTE OF THE LEGISLATURE TO CREATE OR CALL A CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. THEN YOU NEED A MAJORITY VOTE OF THE DELEGATES TO ACTUALLY HAVE SOMETHING. AND THEN IT GOES TO THE VOTERS. WHAT KIND OF THINGS COULD THEY LOOK AT? BECAUSE I KNOW A LOT OF PEOPLE ARE CONCERNED THAT IF YOU POP THE HOOD AND START TINKERING WITH THINGS, EVERYTHING IS AVAILABLE RIGHT THERE. SO IS THERE CONCERN THAT, UH, I DON’T THINK THERE’S ANY ARGUMENT THEY PROBABLY NEED TO DO THIS. I THINK THE LAST TIME THE CONSTITUTIONAL, THE CONSTITUTION, LAST TIME THE STATE OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, I BELIEVE, WAS 1974, OR AT LEAST THE MID 70S, I BELIEVE, IS THAT, WELL, THAT’S THE LAST SUCCESSFUL CONSTITUTIONAL OAK ISLAND ACTUALLY WON IN 1982, WHERE THE THE. LEGISLATURE CALLED THEMSELVES. AND AS THEIR OWN DELEGATES, WHICH IS KIND OF WHAT THEY’RE LOOKING TO DO NOW. UH, AND THAT, YOU KNOW, THEY HAD SOME GREAT IDEAS. UM, BUT THAT DID NOT PASS AT THE, AT THE BALLOT. UM, SO I DON’T KNOW THAT THIS IS THE BEST WAY TO GET SOMETHING PASSED THAT THE VOTERS, UH, BUT THEN ACTUALLY SEE, OVER THE NEXT DECADE, A LOT OF THE IDEAS THAT WERE PROPOSED IN THAT CONVENTION ACTUALLY GOT ADOPTED THROUGH NORMAL AMENDMENT PROCESS. SO IS THIS SOMETHING THAT IF THEY DO IT, WHAT ARE THINGS THEY COULD TOUCH OR TINKER WITH? WHAT ARE SOME OF THE BIG HOT BUTTON ISSUES THAT THAT ARE ON THE TABLE FOR A CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION THAT, THAT PEOPLE WATCHING THIS, THAT VOTERS REALLY WILL BE IMPACTED BY. SO, SO THE BIG HOT BUTTON ISSUES, UH, LET ME LET ME SAY FIRST OFF, PA IS IN FAVOR OF CONSTITUTIONAL REFORM. WE DON’T NECESSARILY CARE IF IT’S A CONVENTION OR NORMAL AMENDMENT PROCESS. THERE IS JUST TOO MUCH IN THE CONSTITUTION. IT IS NOT A FUNDAMENTAL DOCUMENT. YOU KNOW, THINK ABOUT WHEN YOU THINK OF THE, YOU KNOW, A NORMAL CONSTITUTION. YOU THINK OF SOMETHING LIKE KIND OF LIKE THIS, MAYBE A LITTLE THINNER. WHEN YOU THINK OF THE US CONSTITUTION, YOU KNOW, THIS IS OUR CONSTITUTION. IT IS A VOLUME, UH, OF A LOT OF DETAILS THAT DON’T NEED TO BE IN THERE. UM, SO AND MOST OF THAT IS THE FINANCE SECTION. IT’S ARTICLE SEVEN. IT’S ABOUT TAXES AND SPENDING. IN FACT, THE FINANCE SECTION IS ALMOST THE SAME SIZE AS THE ORIGINAL CONSTITUTION BACK IN 1974. THAT’S. HOW MUCH IT’S GROWN. SO THAT’S WHAT WE THINK THE ISSUE IS AND WHAT WE WANT THE FOCUS TO BE. AND THAT’S WHAT MOST PEOPLE ARE TALKING ABOUT. UM, SO TAXES AND SPENDING OTHER THINGS, UH, ONE THING THAT’S BROUGHT UP IS SORT OF THE RIGHTS SECTION, LIKE, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE A LOT OF RIGHTS ENSHRINED. IN OUR CONSTITUTION. I DON’T THINK THERE’S GOING TO BE A LOT OF DISCUSSION. I KNOW PEOPLE ARE WORRIED ABOUT IT, BUT I DON’T THINK THAT’S AN ISSUE. SOME OTHER ONES, UH, ARE THE THE K 12 FUNDING FORMULA KNOWN AS THE MFP. UH, I KNOW THERE WILL BE SOME DISCUSSION OVER THAT ON WHETHER OR NOT THAT SHOULD STAY WITH ONLY FUNDING PUBLIC SCHOOLS OR SHOULD IT FUND PRIVATE SCHOOLS. PA’S TAKE IS THAT IT SHOULD ONLY FUND PUBLIC EDUCATION, BUT I KNOW THERE ARE DIFFERENCES OF OPINION ON THAT. UM, YOU ALSO MAYBE SEE SOME THINGS ABOUT CIVIL SERVICE. UM, I THINK PEOPLE WOULD LIKE TO SEE EITHER A MUCH MORE STRIPPED DOWN OR NO CIVIL SERVICE. UM, PA DEFINITELY BELIEVES THERE NEEDS TO BE A CIVIL SERVICE, ALTHOUGH WE UNDERSTAND IT CAN GET KIND OF BUREAUCRATIC. AND SO SOME, YOU KNOW, DIET FOR THAT. BUT CORE OF WHAT, UH, GOVERNOR LANDRY IS TRYING TO PROPOSE IS TO NOT NECESSARILY ELIMINATE ANYTHING BUT TO MOVE INTO STATUTE. SO RIGHT NOW, THERE MIGHT BE, YOU KNOW, BUDGET, UM, REPLACEMENT FUND, UH, AND, AND YOU WOULDN’T GET RID OF THAT FUND, BUT YOU WOULD PUT IT INTO STATUTE BECAUSE IT DOESN’T NEED TO BE IN THE CONSTITUTION. SO THE EVERYTHING I’VE HEARD SO FAR AND ITS ALIGNMENT WITH PA SAYING IS JUST, LET’S GET SOME OF THE STUFF OUT OF CONSTITUTION THAT SHOULD BE IN LAW IN THE FIRST PLACE. NOW, WHEN YOU GET IN THERE, IT’S UNCLEAR WHAT THE LAW MEANS. YOU CAN’T HAVE A LIMITED CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. UM, AT LEAST THAT’S WHAT THE CONSTITUTION SAYS. BUT WHEN YOU ACTUALLY GET IN THERE, CAN YOU RESTRICT DELEGATES? IT’S UNCLEAR BASED UPON SOME ATTORNEY GENERAL’S OPINIONS AND SOME SOME OTHER THOUGHTS. SO WE HAVE TO ASSUME THAT IT COULD GO INTO ANYTHING. EVEN I DON’T KNOW THAT ANYONE WANTS TO DO. ALL RIGHT, STEPHEN PROCOPIO IN BATON ROUGE WITH PA, THE PUBLIC. PUBLIC AFFAIRS RESEARCH COUNCIL OF LOUISIANA, WE APPRECIATE YOUR TIME AND YOUR INSIGHT. I KNOW YOU AND YOUR TEAM ARE ON TOP OF THIS ON A DAILY BASIS, BECAUSE THE LEGISLATIVE SESSION IS IN FULL SWING RIGHT NOW, AND IT RUNS UNTIL JUNE. A LOT OF BIG TOPICS THAT YOU TOUCHED ON, YOU CAN WATCH THIS ENTIRE HOT SEAT SEGMENT STARTING MONDAY MORNING ON OUR WEBSITE, WDSU DOT COM. STEPHEN PROCOPIO, THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. I’M TRAVERS MACKEL THAT’S ALL THE TIME THAT WE HAVE FOR