Q&A with Senate President Cameron Henry on the Louisiana Legislature's session
This is an interview with Louisiana Senate President Cameron Henry, R-Metairie, that took place earlier this month about his priorities for the state legislative session that started Monday. It has been edited for length and clarity. You can also listen to a version of this interview on our new podcast The Light Switch. O'DONOGHUE: I want to talk about what you think are the big issues during the session.
HENRY: One of the big topics, I think, is going to be the transformation of the [Department of Transportation and Development]. I think there's some great people that work over there. I think the system that is set up and has been in place for so long really doesn't afford them the opportunity to be as successful as they want. The governor has looked at different states, specifically Tennessee, as a model to kind of begin that transition. I think we're going to make some good progress on it this year. It's just a multi-year process, but it's something that has to get done, because there's nothing more frustrating for citizens.
O'DONOGHUE: When you talk about restructuring DOTD, are you talking about fewer state workers working there? Are we outsourcing more things? HENRY: They want to make sure that the folks that are working over there now have a purpose, have responsibilities, and are doing a good job.
The number of employees is really going to be based on the amount of actual work being done. … I believe we have something around maybe 5,000 employees and 500 engineers. If, after we put all this together, if that's how many employees we need, then that's how many employees we will have. If we can trim that down and put more money into actual concrete, I think that's a better purpose for it. O'DONOGHUE: On March 29, there were constitutional amendments on the ballot that didn't pass. Amendment 2 probably has an impact on budget and tax issues. Can you talk about what you think might come back that was Amendment 2? That you all might relook again at again during the session? HENRY: Well I mean, obviously, Amendment 2 would have been pretty significant for our budget, specifically on the recurring dollars part. It didn't pass. We have to move on. I'm sure members are going to look at possibly dissecting that larger amendment into smaller amendments. But you know, you really have to step back and make sure that the next time that's on the ballot, even in a scaled down version, we have the ability to really sell it better, with greater explanation, and not have as many things on the ballot. We are going to come back in the future with a similar amendment, but maybe breaking that down into different sections, maybe picking one or two really hot topics within that. It's something that we have to do in the long run. We have too much recurring dollars going into these funds that we can never get into. … You're putting money into your savings account at a low interest rate, and you're borrowing money at a higher interest rate. It just doesn't make sense.
O'DONOGHUE: Do you think you all are going to look at trying to find a way to get some of that money back into the budget for teachers [pay stipends]? HENRY: It's whether or not we want to kind of piecemeal it, or do we want to step back and say there's got to be a better way in the future to give teachers a pay raise instead of a stipend? So maybe we don't give that this year, or that [total stipend] amount this year, and we look forward to further clarifying what we wanted to do in the amendment and bringing that back in the future. O'DONOGHUE: Do you expect there will be a big conversation around civil service? Obviously we're seeing a big conversation at the federal level around public sector workers. HENRY: I want flexibility to give certain people raises who are excelling but also allow them, some of them, to work from home, remote work, more flexibility, and the system in place now with civil service does not give, I guess, supervisors or the governor the flexibility to put people where they need to be.
Some of them have a skill set that they work better in the office. Some of them have a skill set to work better from home. Their jobs allow them to do that. So I would like to let every employee excel at their own rate and not be tied to one system that really doesn't afford for that.
O'DONOGHUE: What do you expect to see on insurance? HENRY: [E]veryone wants to lower homeowners insurance and car insurance, and we've passed a significant amount of bills dealing with homeowners insurance … and we're still waiting for our homeowners insurance to go down. We're going to continue to work on trying to lower auto insurance. It's a very sensitive subject to a lot of people. … When we're passing a law, it's not only affecting the bad actors. It affects everyone.
[W]e're trying to balance that while making sure we make the state friendly to get insurance companies here because, obviously, more insurance companies will ideally lower rates. We don't know when, but you can't cede all of your authority and all of your rights to the insurance company on the off chance that they lower your rates.
O'DONOGHUE: [T]here's a lot going on in D.C. right now, sort of a lot of uncertainty about what's being cut and what's not and some of that will affect Louisiana. How are you all trying to prepare for that?
HENRY: At the end of the day, the greatest impact is on the [Louisiana Department of Health], which is about 50% of our budget. …
I'm having conversations with Congressman Scalise and Senator Cassidy to work through these issues of what adjustments you are going to make and can we see them? Can we have a discussion before you implement them? And can you give us maybe five years to implement them? Because when you make a change that reduces a program, the problem still exists. … If the program was a fraud and a fake, of course, you get rid of it. … But again, not all of them are like that.
The legislature and the government have to find a way to fund whatever is cut to make sure we're taking care of the services for the people of Louisiana. So it's going to be difficult, but I mean, it's part of the job. It's why we ran for office. So I'm confident that our delegation, and we have a great delegation across party lines up there, we'll make sure that Louisiana doesn't come up short.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
4 hours ago
- The Hill
Democrats pick fight over how GOP's SNAP change hits states
Republicans are defending recent legislation aimed at incentivizing states to fight erroneous payments through the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) — but Democrats are picking a fight over a last-minute change they argue encourages states to have higher error rates. Legislation passed out of the GOP-led Congress on Thursday that could see some states pay a share of benefit costs for SNAP, also known as the food stamps program, for the first time. The federal government currently covers the cost of benefits, but under the plan that's been tossed around by congressional Republicans over the past few months, some states would have to cover anywhere between 5 percent and 15 percent of the benefits costs if they have a payment error rate above 6 percent — which factors in over-and-underpayments. However, changes were made to the text that allowed delayed implementation for the cost-share requirements for states with the highest error rates shortly before its passage in the Senate this week. GOP leadership sought to lock down support from Alaska Sens. Lisa Murkowski and Dan Sullivan, whose state had the highest payment error rate in the country in fiscal year 2024. Sen. John Hoeven (R-N.D.), a member of the Senate Agriculture Committee, said Republicans made the change to comply with chamber rules. 'You have to give those states time to adjust because about all they're going to do is get down to that midrange, and then they're still going to have to pay a penalty because they're so high,' he said. 'So, it's about giving states a fair chance to adjust.' Under the plan that was greenlit by Congress on Thursday, some states would begin contributing a share of benefit costs in fiscal year 2028, depending on their payment error rate. But the plan also allows for delayed implementation for two years for states with payment error rates if they reach around 13.34 percent or higher — an effort Republicans say is aimed at providing states like Alaska with much higher rates to bring them down. Hoeven said the GOP-led agriculture committee, which crafted the SNAP pitch, 'came up with a lot of proposals' trying to comply with restrictive rules governing a special process that Republicans used to approve the plan in the upper chamber without Democratic support. Under the rules, Hoeven said, 'they always said you got to give states time to adjust in order to meet the test.' Republicans say the overall proposal is aimed at incentivizing states to reduce erroneous payments. But Democrats have sharply criticized the plan, arguing it would encourage states with higher error rates to continue making erroneous payments. 'The most absurd example of the hypocrisy of the Republican bill: they have now proposed delaying SNAP cuts FOR TWO YEARS ONLY FOR STATES with the highest error rates just to bury their help for Alaska: AK, DC, FL, GA, MD, MA, NJ, NM, NY, OR. They are rewarding errors,' Sen. Amy Klobuchar (Minn.), top Democrat on the Senate Agriculture Committee, wrote this week as she sounded off in a series of posts on X over the plan. In another swipe at the plan, Sen. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii) wrote on X that he had to text his state's governor that 10 states with 'the MOST ERRORS in administering the program' are 'exempt from food assistance cuts,' at that Hawaii is not exempt because the governor has done 'good work in reducing the error rate by 15 percent.' The comments come as Democrats and advocates have argued the measure could lead to states having to cut benefits because of the shift in cost burden. Recent figures unveiled by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) showed Alaska's payment error rate hit 24.66 percent in fiscal year 2024. The national average was 10.93 percent. Murkowski said after the vote that she didn't 'like' the bill but sought to 'to take care of Alaska's interests.' But she also said she knew 'that, in many parts of the country, there are Americans that are not going to be advantaged by this bill.' 'I don't like the fact that we moved through an artificial deadline, an artificial timeline to produce something, to meet a deadline, rather than to actually try to produce the best bill for the country,' she said. 'But when I saw the direction that this is going, you can either say, 'I don't like it and not try to help my state,' or you can roll up your sleeves.' Republicans also criticized Democrats for challenging a previous GOP-crafted SNAP provision that sought to provide more targeted help to Alaska, as GOP leadership sought to win Murkowski's support for the bill, which ultimately passed the Senate in a tie-breaking vote. However, Democrats opposed previously proposed waivers for the noncontiguous states of Alaska and Hawaii, decrying 'special treatment.' In remarks on Wednesday, House Agriculture Chairman Glenn Thompson (R-Pa.) the Senate 'had to add something to get to address that challenge that Alaska has.' 'The goal is, from a functionality perspective, they need to get their error rate down as soon as possible, because when the time comes, and they have to start to pay, they don't want to be that high error rate that you're coming in now,' he said. 'In most states, Alaska would be a challenge, I think, but most states have been under 6 percent at one time in past years,' he said. However, he also wasn't 'crazy about' work requirements exemptions for some Indigenous populations in the Senate's version of Trump's megabill that didn't appear in the House bill, as Republicans seek to tighten work requirements. 'It's what the Senate had to do,' he said, though he noted that 'economic conditions are challenging on those sovereign lands and in high unemployment, high poverty.' It's unclear whether the carve-outs were the result of talks Alaska senators had with GOP leadership around SNAP in the days leading up to the Senate passage. The Hill has reached out to their offices for comment. The Alaska Department of Labor and Workforce Development said Alaska has 'one of the largest indigenous populations in the nation,' with Alaska Natives representing 17 percent of the state in 2010. At the same time, the Senate bill nixed temporary exemptions that had been preserved in the House bill for former foster youth, homeless individuals and veterans. Despite being preserved in the House plan, Thompson criticized the carve-outs, which were secured as part of a previous bipartisan deal in 2023. 'It cheats all those individuals from having access to that to us funding their SNAP Employment and career and technical education, because the whole goal here is to raise these people out of poverty if they're struggling in poverty, because that's how you qualify for SNAP,' he said. 'And the fact is, they were made ineligible for the really great benefits.' Other proposals in the party's SNAP plan seek to limit the federal government's ability to increase monthly benefits in the future, changes to work requirements and include a chunk of farm provisions. The plan comes as Republicans sought to find ways to generate north of $1 trillion in savings of federal dollars over the next decade as part of a major package that also advances President Trump's tax agenda, which is estimated to add trillions of dollars to the nation's deficits. Republicans say the proposed spending reductions, which are achieved also through changes to programs like Medicaid, are aimed at rooting out 'waste, fraud and abuse' in the federal government. But preliminary research released this week by the Urban Institute found that just the SNAP changes could affect about 22 million families, who researchers said could be at risk of 'losing some or all of their SNAP benefits' under the plan. Asked if last-minute changes to the plan to help other states and not his bothered him, Sen. Jim Justice ( who ultimately voted for the plan, told reporters this week, 'Yes and no.' 'But at the same time, I think they probably had more severe need and so I think it'll be fine,' Justice, a former governor, said Tuesday. 'If it's like any business deal that I've ever seen in my life, you know, the parties of a good business deal walk away after they get something done, and they walk away, and they're probably holding their nose a little bit, and they're probably regretting certain things and saying, 'Doggone, we didn't do good on this and that and everything,' That's a good deal.'
The Hill
4 hours ago
- The Hill
Musk's primary threats pose danger for Republicans
Elon Musk is threatening to primary Republicans who voted for President Trump's 'big, beautiful bill,' posing a challenge for the president and his allies as they look to defy midterm headwinds. Musk vowed earlier this week that Republicans who supported Trump's megabill 'will lose their primary next year if it is the last thing I do on this Earth' as the Tesla CEO has reignited his feud with Trump in recent days. Republicans see the comments as unhelpful, with some saying if the threats come to fruition, it could risk diverting resources away in an election environment that historically hasn't been kind to the president's party in power. 'One of the most destructive behaviors that we've had in cycles where we've been unsuccessful in Senate races … are those in which we have expended massive resources in intraparty warfare,' said one Republican consultant who's worked on Senate races. Ever since Musk ended his stint at the White House, the billionaire has been a vocal critic of Trump's major policy bill, taking particular issue with the projected trillions of dollars multiple analyses say will add to the deficit. The House narrowly passed the final version of the bill on Thursday, and Trump signed it Friday evening at a White House Fourth of July event. But Musk's frustrations reached a new point on Monday when he said he would back challengers to Republicans who supported Trump's agenda-setting legislation, while saying he would also look to protect Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.), a prominent opponent of the bill who has drawn Trump's ire. The Tesla CEO also suggested it was time for a new political party. 'It is obvious with the insane spending of this bill, which increases the debt ceiling by a record FIVE TRILLION DOLLARS that we live in a one-party country — the PORKY PIG PARTY!! Time for a new political party that actually cares about the people,' he said on the social platform X, which he owns. Some lawmakers have sought to brush off Musk's threat. 'I'll take President Trump's endorsement over Elon's any day of the week, back home,' Sen. Roger Marshall (R-Kan.) said in an interview with Just the News's Nicholas Ballasy regarding the potential primary challenge. Marshall said his Republican colleagues were 'ignoring' Musk. Trump, meanwhile, left the door open this week to deporting Musk, who was born in South Africa and became a naturalized U.S. citizen. He also suggested Musk's advisory Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) could be turned against the billionaire and his companies. 'I think what's going to happen is DOGE is going to look at Musk. And if DOGE looks at Musk, we're going to save a fortune,' Trump said while in Florida on Tuesday. 'I don't think he should be playing that game with me.' The White House and a representative for Musk did not respond to requests for comment for this story. Some Republicans expressed skepticism that Musk would actually follow through in launching primary challenges against GOP incumbents, while others didn't view the billionaire's remarks as an immediate threat. 'I think the president is much more popular with the base right now than Elon Musk, and I think our elected representatives are also more popular,' said Mark Jefferson, a former executive director for the Wisconsin GOP. 'I don't take the threat all that seriously, because how do you primary hundreds of people?' asked Georgia-based Republican consultant Brian Robinson. Unlike Musk, Trump has a history of trying to oust Republicans with whom he's been at odds, with varying degrees of success. And Trump's allies have already signaled this cycle they're not afraid to go after holdouts and members of the party they see as stymieing the president and his agenda. A pro-Trump super PAC has already been created with the goal of 'firing' Massie. 'Unless and until Musk can start lining up some A-team candidates or credible people or people in the same wing of the party, he's going nowhere,' said top GOP donor Eric Levine, who described Massie as 'fringe.' Other Republicans suggest it may not be long before Trump and Musk are back on good terms again. While it's too soon to say how serious Musk might be about his primary threats, the moves would be an unnecessary obstacle for the party. 'I hope that he doesn't, obviously, because I think that primary fights normally don't do anything but strengthen the opposition,' said longtime GOP donor Bill Bean. Bean acknowledged that Musk 'has a point' about the GOP legislation raising the deficit, but he also voiced concern that Musk's primary challenges against members of Congress could force Republicans to divert resources from areas where the party might not otherwise have been concerned. 'I think that his money would be much better spent instead of primarying conservative Republicans who maybe aren't 100 percent as conservative or 100 percent agree with him to go out and win elections in swing districts,' Bean said. 'I guarantee you, if we had a 30-seat majority in the House and a 12-seat majority in the Senate, the bill right now going through would be a lot closer to what he would like to see,' he added. Musk's remarks represent a noteworthy shift from just months ago, when he was considered one of Trump's biggest allies. His America PAC spent tens of millions of dollars alone supporting the president during the 2024 election, and he was a critical donor for Wisconsin Republicans earlier this year as they looked to narrow the spending gap against Democrats in the high-stakes state Supreme Court race. Even while Musk has opened up old wounds with Trump over Republicans' major policy bill, it hasn't stopped him from offering some praise for the president. He lauded the president last week over his handling of foreign affairs, writing Wednesday in a post on X: 'Credit where credit is due. @realDonaldTrump has successfully resolved several serious conflicts around the world.' Meanwhile, some Republicans have a warning for Musk, should he follow through on his threats. 'Musk is deeply hated among Democrats. For now, he maintains good standing among Republicans, but if he follows through, he will lose them as well and be a man without a country,' said Michigan-based GOP strategist Jason Cabel Roe in an email to The Hill. 'That will sabotage any political or business initiatives he's involved in.'
Yahoo
4 hours ago
- Yahoo
Sunrun (RUN): Among the Energy Stocks that Gained the Most This Week
The share price of Sunrun Inc. (NASDAQ:RUN) surged by 35.48% between June 26 and July 3, 2025, putting it among the Energy Stocks that Gained the Most This Week. A field of solar panels glistening in the afternoon sun, symbolizing the company's renewable energy ambitions. Sunrun Inc. (NASDAQ:RUN) is America's leading provider of clean energy as a subscription service, offering residential solar and energy storage with no upfront costs. The share price of Sunrun Inc. (NASDAQ:RUN) shot up this week after Senate Republicans excluded the controversial solar excise tax from the final version of President Trump's Big Beautiful Bill. Moreover, though the approved version of the legislation includes the phase-out of the solar industry's tax credits, the phase-down is more gradual than initially expected. Moreover, while the earlier drafts of the bill proposed an abrupt end to a tax credit for solar leasing companies, the final version allowed Sunrun Inc. (NASDAQ:RUN)'s leasing business model to maintain tax credit eligibility until the end of 2027. While we acknowledge the potential of RUN as an investment, we believe certain AI stocks offer greater upside potential and carry less downside risk. If you're looking for an extremely undervalued AI stock that also stands to benefit significantly from Trump-era tariffs and the onshoring trend, see our free report on the best short-term AI stock. READ NEXT: 10 Best Nuclear Energy Stocks to Buy Right Now and Disclosure: None. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
