Louisiana: The State We're In; 292; Legislative Coverage #12

Production assistance for the following program was provided in part through contributions to friends of L.P.B. The charge is being leveled at the capitol this week, concerned the state employees group health plan, and this week state officials went on the defensive. There is only one certainty that I'm going to make, and that is you're not going to find any violation of any rules or regulations or any errors on my part. Maybe people with whom I had trust in conference will be found with sticky fingers. I don't believe it and have no reason to believe it, but I have no concerns at all about our time. Good evening and welcome to this edition of Louisiana, the state we're in.

This week we'll examine the controversies surrounding the state's group health insurance program. On ProCon we'll look at a debate on a lobbyist reporting bill and on profile we'll look at a day in the life of one lobbyist. At first these capital highlights, gasoline shortages in Louisiana continued in the headlines this week. As many service stations closed earlier didn't open it all on weekends, but it was a rising cost of diesel fuel that caused angry truckers to stage a series of protests across the state. Blockades were set up at several truck stops near Lafayette forcing them to shut down, and there were reports of snipers firing at truck drivers in North Louisiana. And Baton Rouge, a group of independent truckers took their complaints to the governor's mansion. Early Thursday morning about 50 trucks rolled onto the grounds directly across from the

mansion. The demonstration intended to show that the drivers mean business when they say they want more and cheaper diesel fuel. Governor Edwards met with the truckers and told them that he was on their side. I'll certainly join with your organization as governor of Louisiana, and we'll fire off a telegram to Dr. Sleston Gen one to the president and asking him to give some extra consideration to not only truckers but all people who are working for a living and who need fuel in order to get to and from work or to use their vehicles in order to produce something and to earn an income to care for themselves and their families. That's about time I think that we demand that people who are working for a living be given consideration and the tools with which to earn a living because that's what makes things in this country go. We cannot exist unless it has circumstances. We have no choice but to share that. Well and that seemed to be the trend national trend, you were just forced to.

This is a regretful of course that people who are working for a living have to stop their work and go to the expense of shutting down in order to get some attention but maybe if this happens nationally it will emphasize the problem and call attention to the plight that you're in and you might end up getting some action. In a later meeting the governor promised truckers that state police would be called in if there were any threats of violence. Edwards also told truck drivers that they could use a state auditorium to hold another rally later this weekend. You know those fuel shortages are causing concerns to motorists who are waiting in gasoline lines and also to government officials late Friday Governor Edward says he has not yet decided to go to any kind of an allocation program but he could change his mind at moments notice. And that's a story that could dominate the news headlines for quite some time. A story that's dominated the legislature was back up again this week. One issue that has generated extensive debate and emotional oratory may be reaching the resolution of sorts sex education was once again debated before the House Education

Committee and although the arguments may have been the same this time the results were different. We're not going to stand here and just butt our heads against the rock of Gibraltar which is this committee. We have come here to say to you. They came in the spirit of compromise hoping to trade off changes in their bill for committee approval and the only major change they would not go along with were penalties for teachers who overstep the legislative intent for the teaching of sex education. One Baton Rouge school board member urged the House Education Committee to approve the bill and turn the responsibility over to the local boards. And this bill will give us that responsibility which we presently do not have. And I think in the interest of locating representative democracy closest to the people being governed that this is precisely the politician you should place your local school boards in. Opponents of sex education not only brought their arguments this time but also a sack of mail which they offered is proof that they were not just a minority.

But after four tough votes on the issue the committee decided to pass them as you're on to the full House for one more round in this year's sex education battle. Well the Louisiana House this week voted overwhelmingly in favor of a bill that requires high school graduates to pass a basic literacy test before receiving their diplomas. The favor will vote followed along debate led by the bill's author representative Lane Carson of New Orleans. For the students themselves for the students of our state to be able to say that when they graduate from a high school in Louisiana that their high school diploma means something. That their 12 years of education means something and that they can proudly tell the world that yes I can read, yes I can write, yes I can hold down that basic job that you want me to hold down and attain the basic funds that I'm going to need in order to take care of my family in the world. You know it's simply amazing that we're debating at this net a bill which would only require prior to graduation that students know how to read and write.

We shouldn't even have a bill to do that. This should be a matter of understanding but how unjust can we be in giving a high school diploma to a student to get read and write. We are doing an injustice to that student, we are doing an injustice to society. The Senate also passed a bill this week dealing with student literacy under that measure by Senator Henry Braden of New Orleans. The student would have to pass a test at the end of each grade. One test in effect for college graduates who want to be teachers, the national teachers exam has been under attack on the legislature this year. A number of bills have been introduced to dilute or circumvent the test results which require a passing grade to enter public school teaching. This week those latest NTE scores for Louisiana's colleges and universities were released showing an overall improvement of almost 13 percent over December's grades.

A predominantly black public institution however the average passing rate was 4 percent. The big story at the Capitol this week surrounded a legislative inquiry into the state's group health insurance plan. The first sign of trouble in the program emerged last month during a routine hearing before the appropriations committee. By this week the situation was being called a crisis of confidence in a witch hunt depending on which side of the fence you sit on. It's the subject of this week's in-depth report. We've heard a lot of allegations provided that came before our subcommittee about administration expenses being hit in the group insurance program. It's budget and we heard of cost plus contracts opening and spending. We heard of splitting of insurance premiums. We heard of employees being hired to administer the state, I mean the sheriff's program in the state group insurance and the state picking up the tab. We heard of employees from the DOA as office that's being paid out of group benefits. We heard a lot of allegations that day and what I've done this morning.

The charges being leveled in committee hearings at the Capitol this week surround the state employees group health insurance program. A program 80,000 state employees pay premiums into for health coverage that protects them in 198,000 dependents. The program is a $50 million a year operation and is run through a complex series of interlocking private contractors in conjunction with the state. It is that administration of the program and not the benefit structure that is at the center of the latest controversy. State government has the ultimate responsibility for the administration of the program which was organized under the management of the division of administration in 1973, but the division is contracted most of the administrative worker of the program to continental assurance company or CNA for short. They have a cost plus contract for the state which pays them $18,000 a month plus expenses which ran up to a million dollars last year. CNA and turn is contracted with ad serve a computer management firm from California to provide a new claims processing system for the group health plan.

This week charges were made that the state is locked into long term contracts costing millions of dollars. The cost plus contracts and overlapping areas of responsibility have left more than a few members of the legislature confused and in fact even reporters have had a hard time sorting out the various contract relationships and determining just who works for whom. Last week the House Appropriations Committee held a 10-hour hearing on the matter that raised some serious questions, specifically there were allegations that ad serve the California firm was brought in to move state employees out of civil service control, allegations that an accountant in the group health plan was instructed by a top administration official to hide $1 million in expenses. Charges of insurance fee splitting on extra insurance coverage offered by the plan and charges that lavish expense accounts were passed out by the contracting consultants at state expense. Just to bring up the charges was Hubert Linskum, an employee of the state plan and later an employee of ad serve.

After he blew the whistle on the ledge in propriety he was fired by ad serve and has since spent a lot of time at the Capitol seeing that his accusations get a hearing. Also joining in on the attack of the program is Bob Dornblazer, a former manager of the program for the Division of Administration. He recently quit that job and is now backing up the charges leveled by Linskum. The credibility of both men came under attack early this week, however, as Governor Edwards told reporters Monday he didn't consider the allegations to be valid. What you have is some hearsay testimony by disgruntled employees that got fired, that isn't serious, nor is it an accusation. To the extent that it is, the legislative committee will continue its investigation and if any substance is found in these statements then of course I will address it. I do not have any reason to believe that there's any evidence about the insurance program. The same legislators that are quick to grab headlines by making irresponsible charges are the first ones to call us when the claims aren't paid.

And we have a responsibility to administer the program and to get people to do it. As you know, this whole thing came about because civil service classified a group of employees about working in this department and was necessary to go in contract in order to get the claims process because people have a right to get paid when they have a claim on the second accident policies, whether it's with the state or other people. Although Governor Edwards said that both men acted in retaliation for being fired, Bob Dornblazer said he didn't resign until after his complaints contained in the letter work ignored by the Division of Administration and the Governor. And I made every attempt to straighten the problems out that we had in group insurance and I tried to deal within the system. I even defended the system and many instances where I really didn't believe that what I was saying was a hundred percent right.

But I tried to work within the system, the straight and the program out because the program is a good program benefit wise and it's a good benefit for the employees of the State of Louisiana. The premium structure is really a good one and I just think that the program itself was worth salvaging, problem-lizing the administration of it and I was never given the authority that I understood that I had when I was hired in November of 77. To say you tried to work within the system, when you began to see problems and you began to register complaints, you took them as high as the Governor I understand. Yes, eventually I went to the Governor on March 23rd this year. I met with him at the mansion and went over the problems with him. And what was the response? The Governor told me that he would look into my concerns and that he would get back with me. Of course we heard in testimony the Governor this week told a committee that disgruntled

employees were making lodging complaints and they should have worked within the system before. How did that make you feel? Well, the only thing I could think is the Governor had some misinformation first about being fired because I was not fired or resigned and secondly that he had forgotten about our meeting that we had in March at the mansion. Now, gentlemen, the purpose of my appearing here is not to defend the program, our to defend your terrible, our to defend Charlie Roma, our to castigate any of the disgruntled ex-employees who suddenly are privy to all this horrible information that they kept locked in their bosoms during all the months they were on the payroll. The purpose of my period. On Tuesday, Governor Edwards responded again to the insurance controversy this time before a legislative committee. He was accompanied by Division of Administration Chief Charles Roma and although Edwards asked committee members to hear both sides of the story, he made it clear that Roma and

his assistant Joe Terrell were the men who should have the answers. And I think in fairness before people rushed to judgment and mixed statements like we've been had before the other side is heard that you ought to listen to everybody involved in the program. We may have been had, and I'm not going to say here today we haven't been had, but I don't think any member of this committee knows any more about the program than I do and I'm going to tell you now I'm not in a position to affect the judgment. But there are people that can give you the information that you need. You don't have to miss the ballot concern yourself about whether you have subpoena powers. Everybody that works in this program and everyone that works for me is instructed as of now and was instructed last Saturday to voluntarily give you every piece of information he has, submit himself to interrogation under oath and any time you require it. And if you find any of them unwilling unable to do so, you report it to me and I will take action to serve as association with the program and with the state.

With that statement I'll simply say that I offer you my full cooperation, there is only one certainty that I'm going to make and that if you're not going to find any violation of any rules or regulations or any errors on my part, maybe people with whom I had trust in conference will be found with sticky fingers. I don't believe it and have no reason to believe it, but I have no concerns at all about it. And I appreciate the fact that some of you have expressed some concerns to me, but don't concern yourself about it. You use a big hack song, get in there, open up the jungles, see what you can find and I assure you any reasonable recommendation you make to make in the program better, I will adopt. One day later a special select committee was appointed by the House Speaker to investigate the insurance controversy. Charing that committee was representative Vijay Bella who got down to business immediately lining up witnesses and hearings. An observer during the first hearing was Baton Rouge District Attorney O.C. Brown, who is conducting his own investigation into the matter, an investigation that he says will not

conflict with the legislative probe. We issued yesterday afternoon and then had served or began serving today. subpoenas for various persons who have testified or who will be called a testify before this committee. This is not a grand jurisopena. Everybody who will be interviewed by our office will be advised of his or her rights very carefully and we want you to know that we are going to work with this committee every way we can and we don't want any person to subpoena to say that he or she can't talk to this committee because of the district attorney's office on the contrary. Our subpoenaing them should encourage them to talk to this committee and if anyone uses that as a blind or tempt to use that as a blind, our master will be present to inform this committee that that just isn't so. By Thursday, Commissioner of Administration Charles Romer decided to beat the investigative committee to the punch and delivering his side of the story to the public. As he and his assistant Joe Terrell, who is head of the state group health plan, met

with reporters. We simply feel that there's a lot of misunderstanding or lack of understanding. There's been no ripoffs that we know of, there's been no massive expenditures that can't be either documented or explained if there were judgments that were made that were in error. We're certainly willing and ready to admit this. For over an hour, Romer and Terrell answered questions and contended that their actions were merely intended to save the insurance program from possible chaos. The program was simply deteriorated to the point where Mr. Lynch from organization sicked out for two or three days. I mean, how can you run an organization as sensitive as we all know group insurance is? You don't get a claim paid or somebody's problem handled. You're in trouble. And we simply had lost competent management out there and the only choice that we had at that point was to give it to CNA who handled the rest of the administration for the program.

So my choice was to have a fragmented staff of clerical workers primarily with no leadership and no management and not getting a job done or to give it to someone who could get the job done. And that is what we did. At week's end, it was clear that despite hearings, interviews, and press conferences, the controversy over the state's group health insurance program was still unresolved. The select committee continues its hearings over the weekend and the district attorney plans to call in more witnesses in the future. Last week, we reported that state Senator Tony Garisco had swapped out his ERA bill for a favorable committee assignment for a lobbyist reporting bill. But when news of that deal leaked out, his lobby bill was sent back to the original committee where it died this week. The question of whether lobbyists should be required to report what they spend on lawmakers is the topic of this week's pro-con. Easy in a legislature, the lobby is south-number the lawmakers two to one. And for several years, Senator Tony Garisco of Morgan City has been trying to persuade other

legislators to adopt a tough new law governing lobby activity. That bill would limit the size of lobbyists' gifts to $100 within a one-year period and require the reporting of all lobbying expenses. The measure went down to defeat in committee this week, but not before too lobbyists argued each side of the issue. We believe citizens in a democracy have a right to know how their government works, and particularly how those government decisions are influenced by organized outside interests. At the state level, key aspects of the government decision-making process are already open to public scrutiny, legislative committee hearings, and those boards and commission meetings in the executive branch are open to the public, the administrative procedures act provides a mechanism for public input and information about campaign finances has just recently been allowed to be disclosed. But the public remains unable to learn anything meaningful about the activities of lobbyists and their efforts to influence government decision-making. The courts have recognized the validity of requiring public disclosure of lobbying activities

from the U.S. Supreme Court through many state Supreme Court decisions. And 46 states now require some form of disclosing how much lobbyists spend to influence government decision-making. I object to the bill number one, because I think all of this paperwork that you're putting on us is unnecessary. Number two, I think all you're making is the news media, the most powerful lobbying force in Louisiana. I resent being called a second-class citizen, and to me, this is what you do when you make us register and make us report. We are not spending the state or the taxpayers' money. The role of the lobbyist in the legislative process is not only complex but often misunderstood. It's a job that requires diligence, stamina, and the ability to cut deals. This week in a break from the campaign trail, we present a profile of New Orleans lobby as Tom Sprattley that was prepared by Charlie Zee, we have W.R.E.S. in New Orleans. Driving to the Capitol, cigarette in hand, 39-year-old Tom Sprattley's mind is already an overdrive.

With re-breakfast under his belt, Sprattley begins his day on the run at the legislature with a briefcase full of fact sheets, computer readouts, and copies of legislative bills. 10th row of hours a day at this suggestion. Lobbyists outnumber legislators, almost two to one in the Louisiana legislature, and some people argue they are more effective lawmakers. 277 lobbyists have registered for the 1979 session. And while most of them are from Louisiana, there are a few from other states, including some from Esquireway as Washington, D.C. in New Mexico. Many in a law requires lobbyists to register with the Secretary of State of the Clerk of the House of Representatives before they lobby. They must identify their clients, give business addresses, and generally explain the nature of the interest they represent. Employment verification forms must be executed and filed by special interest organizations that employ the lobbyists. Many of the lobbyists or lawyers who find lobbying a lucrative part-time occupation. Others are heads of organizations or employees of those groups, and there are some people

like Sprattley, whose only occupation is lobbying. A native of Arkansas, Sprattley has been lobbying for the New Orleans Chamber of Commerce since 1978. Before that, he worked with other chambers in Shreveport and Lake Charles. His title is Manager of Governmental Affairs for the Chamber, but the synonym for the fancy title is lobbyists. Somebody makes it a habit to stay close to the action he douses his tenth drag of the morning and looks in on the House action. Later he gets an update from New Orleans lobbyist Gary Forrester about the metropolitan transit bill. Trans it comes up in transportation, there's a number of conversations on the run. It's all part of Sprattley's daily routine. Here lobbying is concerned that the legislature business and laborers split their forces. The AFL-CIO has eight registered lobbyists while the Louisiana Association of Business and Industry has ten.

They are a well-paid core of de facto state officials. That is not a reality lost on either the legislators or the lobbyists. They are consummate gamesmen. On this particular day, the House Transportation Committee approves a bill setting up a metropolitan transit authority. Sprattley does not have to testify, the votes are in line without a big show of force. I mean, how would the legislature function if you guys were not around? Well, I can't imagine that. Nature of who was vacuum in the first place and the vacuum up here is information. Probably over 2,000 proposals a year, sometimes nearly 4,000 proposals a year and they may average 40,000 words each.

These guys in there do not have time to sit down and read all of those bills. There is a digest of every bill prepared for them and that's about as far as most of them would really have time to do but it tells you what the bill proposes to do. It doesn't really tell you all of the ramifications along that line and that's what we do. We have to help them. They depend on us to get both sides of the question. It's always considered accurate because for lobbyists lies one time. It goes up to a trusted friend and the legislature and says this is the way the situation is. It turns out not to be that way, he's disenfranchised. I mean, he's lost credibility, they aren't going to take it, they don't know. Keeping for registry but we'll lose his effect at 2 or 3 lives just about why we can. What's the hardest thing you have to watch up here? Really, the hardest thing to do is to keep on top of all of the various proposals I have to watch.

The Chamber of Commerce is different from the typical lobbyists, typical lobbyists may have five bills and he may be paid a lot of money to watch a five bills and motivate them. I kind of think. I've got about 350. So I employ two computers to help me keep in touch, but still yet there's a human factor involved and there's so many things happening and there's just one of me up here usually all the way I have on some help today. The thing is most likely go wrong is I just can't get to all the meetings I need to get to. You're a very hyper kind of person. Yeah, you have to be. Yeah, you have to be. Well, there's no room for lethargic people in this business, it's just not time. The critical path scheduling really comes to a point in this kind of endeavor. You have to be where you need to be, when you need to be there or you may have blown the whole ball games. Well, that was certainly an insider's view of what goes on the stay capital and we'll be back next week with more. I hope you join us then. I'm Beth George, Ron Bloam, good evening. The preceding has been an LPB production.

Production assistance for the preceding program was provided in part through contributions to friends of LPB.