Help is NOT on the way.

From the moment Jeff Landry took the oath of office, Louisiana has experienced a barrage of initiatives that, for many, signal not just a new approach to governance but also a definitive departure from past practices. Whereas Governor John Bel Edwards was seen as a reformer and a bearer of good change, Landry has from the outset seemed to be a bearer of bad tidings.

Landry made it very clear from the outset that he wanted to do a massive rollback of all of the reforms to the criminal justice system that had take place under Edwards’ administration, ALL of which were done under the label of bipartisanship. At the time of their introduction, testimony, evidence and support was presented by many in the community, and strong voices for advocacy were heard by all of the committees. Evidence was presented to the committees, statistics were given, and in the end, both parties agreed that the changes were needed. Edwards wasted no time in signing the bills, and they became law.

With Landry’s advent upon the scene, he wasted no time in undoing ALL of it. Remember, though, that Landry came into office with only a fraction of the state’s voting populace. Records show that AG Jeff Landry won the governor’s office with 547,827 votes. Louisiana has 2,970,167 registered voters – meaning that Landry was elected by getting support from 18 percent of the state’s voters.

Unofficial turnout was 35.8 percent, records at the Secretary of State show. That’s the lowest turnout number since 1999, which is the earliest figures on the SOS website. The election that came closest, in 2011, was 37.4 percent turnout when incumbent Bobby Jindal ran for re-election with no significant challenge.

If you look at how many eligible voters there are, Landry’s percent drops even more. It’s estimated that there are 3,463,372 people in Louisiana who are eligible to vote. His 547,827 votes are only 16 percent of that number.

So, Landry clearly DID NOT come into office with anything approaching a mandate from “the people”. 18% of a state’s voting base is nowhere near a mandate. Yet his voice is strident as he basically tells voters that, “If you don’t like it, go!”

And, indeed, that’s what people are doing – going. The tone in Louisiana is “I’d better get out of here now, because they’ll come after me next.” And, Landry makes no bones that he and the legislature are going to do exactly that.

Just in the past few weeks, the legislature has taken strong and strident steps, blocking virtually all input from the public on major legislation. Just recently, they’ve done the following:

The new laws fulfill Landry’s campaign promises and mark a big win early in his term. They reverse some criminal justice policies from the previous governor, Edwards, aiming to cut costs by jailing fewer people. This shift puts funding for victim services at risk.

ACTIONS BY THE LEGISLATURE

How much will Gov. Jeff Landry’s criminal justice changes cost? State officials can’t say.

Governor Jeff Landry’s criminal justice package in Louisiana has raised questions about its cost. Here are the key points:

wiDeath Penalty:

• Proposal: Governor Landry sought to resume death row executions after a 14-year pause.
• Legislature’s Response: They passed a bill that adds nitrogen gas and electrocution as execution methods.
• Outcome: Governor Landry signed the bill expanding execution methods.

1. Juvenile Offenders:
   • Proposal: Measures to address violent carjackings, shootings, and homicides committed by youths.
   • Legislature’s Response:
     • A bill treating all 17-year-olds charged with crimes as adults (a rollback of the state’s “Raise the Age” law).
     • A law making certain juvenile criminal records public.
   • Outcome: Both bills related to juvenile offenders were signed into law.
2. Parole:
   • Proposal: Sweeping changes to determine how long certain incarcerated people remain in prison and when, or if, they would be allowed a second chance at freedom.
   • Legislature’s Response:
     • A bill that effectively eliminates parole for anyone convicted after August 1, with few exceptions.
     • A bill that reduces the amount of “good time credit” that prisoners can accumulate.
   • Outcome: Both bills related to parole were signed into law.

The cost estimates for these proposals have not been released by the Legislature’s financial analysts. Republican lawmakers argue that safety outweighs costs, emphasizing the need for public safety even thout precise expense figures.

Summary: Governor Landry’s crime bills cover execution methods, juvenile offenders, and parole. While the cost remains uncertain, lawmakers prioritize safety over expenses.

The impact of Governor Landry’s crime legislation during the special session appears to be substantial, especially considering Louisiana’s existing budget challenges. Here are the key points:

1. Lengthening Prison Sentences:
   • Governor Landry supports proposals to extend prison sentences, making it tougher for incarcerated individuals to be released.
   • These measures are likely to increase Louisiana’s inmate population and result in additional costs for the state over the long term.
2. Budget Implications:
   • Thirteen of Landry’s criminal justice bills would contribute to state spending, as indicated by fiscal notes attached to the legislation.
   • Budget analysts have labeled these items as causing an “indeterminable increase” in the state’s financial obligations.
3. Expensive Measures:
   • Bills aimed at lengthening prison sentences for carjacking, increasing penalties for illegal weapon use, and significantly reducing parole are particularly costly.
   • The prison system’s expenses could potentially grow by more than $11 million each per year if the harshest sentences are consistently imposed, according to analysts.

It’s essential to weigh the impact on public safety against the financial burden when considering these tough-on-crime measures.

‘We will find a way…’

Certainly, the debate over the cost of Governor Landry’s crime legislation is a critical aspect. Here are the key points:

• Republican Perspective:
  • Republicans supporting the legislation argue that the costs are justified because public safety is of utmost importance.
  • Representative Debbie Villio, a former prosecutor and sponsor of legislation to eliminate most parole, acknowledges that this isn’t necessarily a fiscally responsible bill but emphasizes the priority of safety.
• Budget Implications:
  • The expenses associated with these measures could potentially exacerbate future state budget gaps.
  • Louisiana is projected to face annual financial shortfalls exceeding half a billion dollars starting in 2025.
  • The expiration of a 0.45% portion of the state sales tax next year will leave the state financially strained.
  • Governor Landry’s additional public safety spending will contribute to widening those budget holes.
• Other Measures:
  • Governor Landry’s plan to add a state police troop in New Orleans is estimated to cost $10 million over the next four months.
  • Senate President Pro Tempore Regina Barrow raises a valid question: Where will the funding come from?

Balancing public safety with fiscal responsibility remains a critical challenge for policymakers in Louisiana.

GOP cutbacks

Over the past year, Republicans have been willing to pick over several other budget proposals in the name of fiscal responsibility. 

Due to the planned sales tax cut next year, Landry and GOP lawmakers have said they don’t think the state can afford to give public school teachers a permanent raise.

The governor stripped funding for several programs, including domestic violence shelters, from his first state budget proposal in an effort to cut public spending. He also issued an executive order last month directing state agency heads to look for savings and budget cuts within their own departments.  

The governor’s own public safety bills haven’t been subjected to the same scrutiny. 

“I haven’t seen that [cash] machine yet, but we’ve got some money coming from somewhere,” Sen. Gerald Boudreaux, D-Lafayette, joked last week during a discussion of the financial impact of Landry’s crime legislation. “I don’t want to get to the point where we ignore the fiscal part of these plans.”

Lawmakers are moving the governor’s public safety bills so fast that the fiscal analyses of proposals haven’t even been completed. Good government doesn’t act, react, or respond in this manner.

Legislative staff are still waiting on information from the Department of Public Safety and Corrections, the Louisiana Sheriffs Association and the Louisiana District Attorneys Association to finish financial impact reports for nine bills, according to their notes. 

THE MONEY HAS TO COME FROM SOMEWHERE…

Despite the lack of concrete data, the legislation continues to advance. The proposals were poised for final votes by the end of the week. Scott Peyton, director of Right on Crime, a conservative organization advocating for less incarceration, observes that conservatives, especially concerning public safety, are often willing to issue a blank check. That check may bounce, says the author, who has 47 years of experience behind the bars of Angola.

Some Republican lawmakers anticipate that the financial impact of lengthening prison sentences may not be as severe as the legislative analyses suggest. Their argument is that more severe sentencing should act as a deterrent, dissuading individuals from committing crimes and ending up in prison. The author says he can’t think of a single person who actually stopped and thought about the ultimate consequences of their decision to commit a crime.

However, studies paint a different picture. Over the past two decades, 19 states (including Texas and Mississippi) have successfully lowered their prison populations and crime rates by investing in rehabilitative programs for formerly incarcerated individuals and exploring prison alternatives. Research consistently shows that higher incarceration rates do not necessarily correlate with lower violent crime rates.

Louisiana’s history reflects this struggle. Despite decades of adopting a tough-on-crime approach, the state continued to grapple with one of the country’s highest crime rates. Balancing public safety and fiscal responsibility remains a complex challenge for policymakers.

Former Governor John Bel Edwards took a different approach in 2017, working alongside state lawmakers to reduce prison sentences and expand parole and probation opportunities. This bipartisan strategy resulted in significant savings on incarceration expenses over seven years, while also allocating funds toward crime prevention programs and victim services.

However, Governor Landry attributes the spike in violent crime during the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 and 2021 to Edwards’ criminal justice overhaul. Republicans share concerns about ongoing issues with teenagers in the juvenile justice system, including destruction and escapes from state facilities across Louisiana.

Senator Heather Cloud, a supporter of Landry’s criminal justice package, emphasizes that while discussions often focus on the financial costs of these bills, investing in them ultimately translates to saving lives.

IN CONTRAST, LOOK AT EDWARDS’ APPROACH TO CRIME

Former Governor John Bel Edwards implemented several key strategies that contributed to cost savings in Louisiana’s criminal justice system:

1. Reduced Prison Sentences:
   • Edwards worked with state lawmakers to shorten prison sentences for certain offenses.
   • By reducing the length of incarceration, the state saved on expenses related to housing, food, and medical care for inmates.
2. Expanded Parole and Probation Opportunities:
   • The bipartisan approach allowed for more individuals to be eligible for parole and probation.
   • This shift helped decrease the prison population and, consequently, the associated costs.
3. Investment in Crime Prevention Programs:
   • Instead of solely focusing on punitive measures, Edwards allocated resources to rehabilitative programs.
   • These programs aimed to address the root causes of criminal behavior, reducing recidivism and long-term incarceration costs.
4. Victim Services:
   • Edwards prioritized funding for victim services, providing support to those affected by crime.
   • By assisting victims, the state aimed to prevent future criminal activity and promote community safety.

Overall, Edwards’ approach emphasized a balance between public safety and fiscal responsibility, resulting in significant savings while maintaining a focus on rehabilitation and prevention.

PHOTO GOES HERE

While Landry has clearly stated and shown his intention to impose harsher penalties, he is also making extensive moves to block prisoners from gathering information to pursue post-conviction relief from their convictions.

Not only is he attempting to shield his office and most state agencies’ records from public inspection, he has made explicit moves to specifically block prisoners from obtaining hidden files, say from prosecutors who may have hidden the information before/during trial, or medical examiners who may have records relating to the case. Another layer of bureaucracy to wade through. An excerpt of the proposed statute is below.

Landry Is Doing ANYTHING to hide his files from public view, and especially from prisoners who they might FREE.

A database created in Louisiana in 2015 to help track the certifications of police officers has failed to keep cops convicted of crimes off police departments in the state. THE APPEAL/INVISIBLE INSTITUTE THE MARSHALL PROJECT IN Context: Police recruiters have a few questions. THE MARSHALL PROJECT

The National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), administered by the US Census Bureau under the Department of Commerce, provides valuable insights into criminal victimization. Here are some key points based on the NCVS:

1. Frequency of Crime Victimization:
   • The NCVS collects data from a nationally representative sample of about 240,000 persons in approximately 150,000 households each year.
   • It focuses on both nonfatal personal crimes (such as rape, robbery, assault, and larceny) and household property crimes (including burglary and motor vehicle theft), whether reported to the police or not1.
2. Information Collected: For each victimization incident, the NCVS gathers information about:
   • The offender, including age, race, sex, and victim-offender relationship.
   • Characteristics of the crime, such as time and place of occurrence, use of weapons, injuries sustained by the victim, and economic consequences.
   • Whether the crime was reported to the police.
   • Reasons for reporting or not reporting the crime.
   • Victim experiences with the criminal justice system1.
3. Historical Context:
   • The NCVS has been ongoing since 1973 and remains a critical source of information on criminal victimization in the United States.
   • It helps policymakers understand victim experiences, crime trends, and the impact of criminal justice policies1.

While the NCVS provides valuable data, it’s essential to recognize that victim preferences and needs can vary significantly. Policymakers must consider a range of perspectives when addressing crime prevention and victim services

Most victims of crime express a desire for fairer penalties rather than excessively harsh ones. While it’s essential to hold offenders accountable, research shows that overly severe punishments may not necessarily enhance public safety or address the needs of victims12. Striking a balance between justice, rehabilitation, and victim support remains a complex challenge for policymakers.

According to REASON.COM:

Two recent reports from the U.S. Sentencing Commission (USSC) shed light on the legal treatment of sex offenders and further undermine the prevailing assumption that all members of that broad class pose similar threats to public safety. That assumption, which underlies both harsh punishments and indiscriminate registration requirements, is demonstrably wrong.

Harsher sentences for those who commit sexual assaults are not the solution to the prevalence of these crimes, according to a paper published in the Southwestern University Law Review.

“While it is more or less assumed that longer sentences mean more justice, the reality is much more complicated and nuanced to the extent that our conception of justice is concerned with effectively preventing sexual harm and holding people accountable for that harm,” wrote Guy Hamilton-Smith, a Legal Fellow at the Sex Offense Litigation and Policy Resource Center at the Mitchell Hamline School of Law.

Louisiana is not alone in efforts to tighten restrictions on prisoners seeking relief from wrongful convictions. New York has recently deprived its prisoners

New York Gov. Kathy Hochul vetoed a bill just before Christmas that would have made it easier for people who have pleaded guilty to crimes to challenge their convictions, Maysoon Kahn reports for the Associated Press. The bill would have expanded the types of evidence that could be considered proof of innocence, including video footage or evidence of someone else confessing to a crime and would have allowed consideration for arguments that a person was coerced into a false guilty plea.

Under existing state law, criminal defendants who plead guilty are usually barred from trying to get their cases reopened based on a new claim of innocence, except in certain circumstances involving new DNA evidence. Prosecutors and advocates for crime victims warned the bill would have opened the floodgates to endless, frivolous legal appeals by the guilty. State Senator Zellnor Myrie, a New York City Democrat who sponsored the bill, said he is considering reintroducing the bill in the next legislative session to give innocent people a “fair chance to reverse a terrible wrong.”

Just because all Americans are supposed to get their day in court doesn’t mean they get justice. But thanks to DNA testing, higher societal awareness and more prosecutorial accountability, the tide is turning from widespread incarceration to freedom and exoneration for wrongly imprisoned persons.

The National Registry of Exonerations found that Texas, despite having some of the toughest laws on crime, led the nation with 363 exonerations in the last 30 years. Other top states based on total numbers of exonerations were Illinois, New York, and California. In Louisiana, which had 63 exonerations in that period, New Orleans is said to be the wrongful conviction capital of the U.S.

Being exonerated of a crime following conviction, of course, does not guarantee that the person will be compensated for all the years stolen from their lives. Louisiana ranks very high in the number of exonerations per 100,000 citizens.  (63)  They also rank very low in cash compensation to wrongfully convicted and exonerated individuals.

In theory, Louisiana provides compensation to exonerees for their wrongful imprisonment. In practice, however, this very seldom happens.

Often, prisoners who are exonerated after DECADES behind bars are never compensated, and sometimes die before ever being understood by the society that wrongfully convicted him/her.

4 eji.org

Louisiana is notorious for this type of action. Failures of the justice system lead to failures of society as a whole. When the system fails, we all fail. When it works, it is often too late.