“I have opposed this pay raise at every turn and from the very beginning. A doubling of legislative pay is clearly excessive and it takes effect prior to the next election, which I believe is bad policy,” Governor Jindal said. “This bill would also have set up a system to give legislators automatic pay raises in the future without additional legislative votes – which is a lack of accountability that we cannot accept….”

“I have said that I was not going to stop legislators from more than doubling their own pay by vetoing this because I did not want to give them any excuse to slow down the momentum of our reform movement here in Louisiana. It turns out this is an unsustainable position. I have come to realize that the reforms I have been fighting for are simply incompatible with this legislative pay raise.

“I was trying to preserve our reform agenda and our momentum by tolerating this legislative pay raise that I knew was completely excessive. But the two cannot coexist.

“The bottom line is that allowing this excessive legislative pay raise to become law would so significantly undercut our reform agenda, and so significantly diminish the people’s confidence in their own government, that I cannot let it become law. So, I have vetoed the bill.”

You need to copy and paste the following information to the respective field…

email addresses:
duplessisa@legis.state.la.us, crowea@legis.state.la.us, websen@legis.state.la.us, murraye@legis.state.la.us, grayc@legis.state.la.us, quinnj@legis.state.la.us, heitmeid@legis.state.la.us, alarioj@legis.state.la.us, lasen9@legis.state.la.us, martinyd@legis.state.la.us, donahuej@legis.state.la.us, websen@legis.state.la.us, erdeyd@legis.state.la.us, dorseyy@legis.state.la.us, lasen15@legis.state.la.us, Lasen16@legis.state.la.us, lasen17@legis.state.la.us, amedeej@legis.state.la.us, websen@legis.state.la.us, lasen20@legis.state.la.us, lasen21@legis.state.la.us, hebertt@legis.state.la.us, lasen23@legis.state.la.us, cravinsd@legis.state.la.us, morrishd@legis.state.la.us, gautreauxn@legis.state.la.us, lasen27@legis.state.la.us, lafleure@legis.state.la.us, lasen29@legis.state.la.us, smithj@legis.state.la.us, longg@legis.state.la.us, risern@legis.state.la.us, walsworthm@legis.state.la.us, thompsof@legis.state.la.us, kostelka@legis.state.la.us, adleyr@legis.state.la.us, shawb@legis.state.la.us, smithcheek@legis.state.la.us, jacksonl@legis.state.la.us, abramson@legis.state.la.us, larep021@legis.state.la.us, armesj@legis.state.la.us, larep102@legis.state.la.us, auberte@legis.state.la.us, larep100@legis.state.la.us, auberte@legis.state.la.us, larep100@legis.state.la.us, badonb@legis.state.la.us, larep053@legis.state.la.us, barrast@legis.state.la.us, larep029@legis.state.la.us, billiotr@legis.state.la.us, burfordr@legis.state.la.us, burnsh@legis.state.la.us, larep089@legis.state.la.us, larep002@legis.state.la.us, carmodyt@legis.state.la.us, carters@legis.state.la.us, champags@legis.state.la.us, larep022@legis.state.la.us, chaneyb@legis.state.la.us, connickp@legis.state.la.us, , cortezp@legis.state.la.us, cromerg@legis.state.la.us, danahaym@legis.state.la.us, danahaym@legis.state.la.us, dixonh@legis.state.la.us, larep010@legis.state.la.us, larep052@legis.state.la.us, larep012@legis.state.la.us, edwardsj@legis.state.la.us, ellingtn@legis.state.la.us, larep013@legis.state.la.us, foilf@legis.state.la.us, franklina@legis.state.la.us, larep011@legis.state.la.us, larep035@legis.state.la.us, gisclait@legis.state.la.us, larep040@legis.state.la.us, larep066@legis.state.la.us, larep041@legis.state.la.us, guinnj@legis.state.la.us, hardyr@legis.state.la.us, harrisoj@legis.state.la.us, hazelc@legis.state.la.us, hendersr@legis.state.la.us, henryc@legis.state.la.us, hinesw@legis.state.la.us, hoffmanf@legis.state.la.us, ahoney@legis.state.la.us, howardf@legis.state.la.us, larep104@legis.state.la.us, jacksong@legis.state.la.us, larep061@legis.state.la.us, johnsoro@legis.state.la.us, jonesr@legis.state.la.us, joness@legis.state.la.us, larep016@legis.state.la.us, larep036@legis.state.la.us, larep081@legis.state.la.us, larep096@legis.state.la.us, larep059@legis.state.la.us, legerw@legis.state.la.us, ligit@legis.state.la.us, littles@legis.state.la.us, lopintoj@legis.state.la.us, larep094@legis.state.la.us, larep099@legis.state.la.us, larep062@legis.state.la.us, larep046@legis.state.la.us, monican@legis.state.la.us, larep097@legis.state.la.us, larep001@legis.state.la.us, nortonb@legis.state.la.us, nowlinr@legis.state.la.us, pearsonk@legis.state.la.us, perryj@legis.state.la.us, larep093@legis.state.la.us, pontie@legis.state.la.us, poper@legis.state.la.us, pughs@legis.state.la.us, richardj@legis.state.la.us, richardc@legis.state.la.us, larep101@legis.state.la.us, larep075@legis.state.la.us, royc@legis.state.la.us, schrodej@legis.state.la.us, simons@legis.state.la.us, larep088@legis.state.la.us, larep008@legis.state.la.us, larep56@legis.state.la.us, smithp@legis.state.la.us, larep060@legis.state.la.us, talbotk@legis.state.la.us, templetr@legis.state.la.us, larep031@legis.state.la.us, larep086@legis.state.la.us, larep18@legis.state.la.us, larep005@legis.state.la.us, larep064@legis.state.la.us, larep004@legis.state.la.us, willmott@legis.state.la.us, larep105@legis.state.la.us

Subject:
I am opposed to SB672

Body:
Dear Honorable members of the Louisiana Senate and House of Representatives,

I am conscientiously opposed to paying my hard-earned money to fund pay raises in a time of near destitution among the people you represent for a raise in the proportions which SB672 proposes. In a time when most everyone is struggling to keep abreast of the rising costs of everything from gas to bread in order to maintain a semblance of normality (and in some cases merely surviving), I strongly believe that the approval of bill SB672 is a vote in the direction contrary to that in which you were elected, albeit in good faith, to represent us in. A normal pay increase of three to ten percent may have been acceptable, but a three-hundred percent raise is unacceptable. Also, the rapidity in which SB672 has progressed through channels without proper explanation to your fellow Louisianians of why this pay raise would be appropriate is an indignity to the citizens who already fund your position.

In short, I do not wish SB672 passed. Thank you for considering my request.