
Jim Beam column:Two bad bills have surfaced
Every session of the Louisiana Legislature — regular or special — has a good number of bad bills. Luckily, most are defeated but some get through.
Thankfully, one of the worst bills in the current session was defeated in committee last week with a 7-7 vote. The authors and supporters of both measures said they have no connection to the four amendments defeated on March 29, but opponents aren't buying that argument.
House Bill 200 by Rep. Dixon McMakin, R-Baton Rouge, was sidetracked by the House and Governmental Affairs Committee. The Advocate reported that McMakin said he wouldn't attempt to revive his legislation.
McMakin wanted to add an unbelievable number of members to the East Baton Rouge Parish Republican Executive Committee. Former state Rep. Woody Jenkins chairs that committee and in an interview he said Gov. Jeff Landry pushed for passage of McMakin's bill to punish Jenkins for campaigning against the four amendments.
Jenkins said doubling the GOP executive committee's membership would lead to his ouster as parish party chairman.
A spokesperson for Gov. Landry said he was unaware of McMakin's bill, although Derek Babcock, the state GOP party chair, said he told the governor during an interview two days earlier he would oppose McMakin's bill and that the two men had agreed to disagree over the measure.
The newspaper said during 90 minutes of tart debate and questioning 'a parade of fellow Baton Rouge Republicans repeatedly told him (McMakin) Wednesday he had committed the egregious sin of wanting state government to meddle in the business of the GOP governing authority in East Baton Rouge Parish.'
Babcock told the committee, 'Political parties are private groups' and 'have the right to establish their own internal rules. State control over committee elections is not necessary.'
Senate Bill 74 by Sen. Alan Seabaugh, R-Shreveport, is the other bad bill. It was amended to say if district attorneys approve, they could move criminal cases with 15- and 16-year-old defendants from juvenile jurisdictions to adult courts.
Those juveniles would still be tried under the juvenile legal code, not the adult code. The original bill automatically moved all those cases to adult courts. The Senate Judiciary C Committee voted 6-1 to send the bill to the full Senate.
The Louisiana Illuminator reported that state Attorney General Liz Murrill wants state lawmakers to pass Seabaugh's bill 'a few weeks after Louisiana overwhelmingly voted down a constitutional amendment that could have led to similar teenage transfers in the criminal justice system.'
Seabaugh, like McMakin, said his bill isn't a response to the amendment because he planned to file his bill before voters rejected the amendment. That reminds me of the old saying, 'If you believe that, I have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you.'
Opponents of Seabaugh's legislation offered some excellent reasons why it's a terrible idea. Some said it would throw four of the state's largest court systems — in Orleans, Jefferson, East Baton Rouge and Caddo parishes — into chaos. They have juvenile courts with judges who solely handle cases involving people under age 17.
Paul Young, a retired Caddo Parish juvenile court judge, said, 'Children are not simply tiny adults that you can handle in adult criminal court.'
Critics say the public sent a clear message on moving minors into the adult system when 66% of them rejected an amendment doing the same thing.
The Illuminator said there is broad consensus that rehabilitation provided in the juvenile system — as opposed to punishment provided in adult prisons — is especially effective for teenagers because their brains haven't fully developed yet.
Jay Dixon, a former state public defender in Louisiana who now works in Massachusetts, said, 'There are tons of studies that show that is the worst thing you can do and all it does is create another generation of criminals.'
Some critics say district courts are already overwhelmed by their current workloads. Young said moving juveniles into those courts would cause severe scheduling challenges.
The Advocate called the defeat of the four constitutional amendments on March 29 'Landry's biggest political defeat as governor to date.' It's long past time for Landry, Murrill, Seabaugh, McMakin and others who are upset over that defeat to get over it. The voters have made it clear how they feel about handling juveniles in the court system.
Jim Beam, the retired editor of the American Press, has covered people and politics for more than six decades. Contact him at 337-515-8871 or jim.beam.press@gmail.com. Reply Forward
Add reaction
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

USA Today
37 minutes ago
- USA Today
Israel, US recall teams from Gaza truce talks; violence near aid distribution continues
On Friday's episode of The Excerpt podcast: Israel and the United States recalled their delegations from Gaza ceasefire talks for consultations Thursday. Plus, hundreds of people have been killed in recent weeks trying to reach food, mostly in mass shootings by Israeli soldiers posted near Gaza Humanitarian Foundation distribution centers. USA TODAY Senior National Columnist for Health and Wellness Laura Trujillo takes a closer look at President Donald Trump and Jeffrey Epstein's relationship over the years. Two GOP senators call for a special counsel to probe former President Barack Obama over the 2016 Trump-Russia investigation. USA TODAY White House Correspondent Joey Garrison discusses a new executive order that makes it easier for cities and states to remove homeless people from the streets. Hulk Hogan has died at 71. Hit play on the player below to hear the podcast and follow along with the transcript beneath it. This transcript was automatically generated, and then edited for clarity in its current form. There may be some differences between the audio and the text. Podcasts: True crime, in-depth interviews and more USA TODAY podcasts right here Taylor Wilson: Good morning. I'm Taylor Wilson, and today is Friday, July 25th, 2025. This is USA TODAY's The Excerpt. Today controversy over US humanitarian aid deliveries and Gaza as hunger concerns grow. Plus we discuss an executive order making it easier to remove homeless people from the streets. And we remember Hulk Hogan. ♦ Israel and the US recalled their delegations from Gaza ceasefire talks for consultations yesterday with US envoy, Steve Witkoff accusing Hamas of failing to act in good faith in the talks. It marked the latest setback in efforts to secure a deal that would bring a ceasefire to Gaza and secure the release of Israeli hostages held by Hamas. Earlier this week, more than 100 largely aid and rights groups called for governments to take action as hunger spreads in Gaza. More than 800 people have been killed in recent weeks trying to reach food, mostly in mass shootings by Israeli soldiers posted near Gaza Humanitarian Foundation distribution centers. Women going to pick up aid for their families yesterday said US contractors organizing distribution asked them to come to pick up goods and then fired tear gas and pepper spray at them. Asked for comment, a spokesperson for the aid organization, the GHF said a limited amount of pepper spray was used to prevent civilian injury due to overcrowding. GHF, a US and Israeli-backed organization began distributing food packages in Gaza at the end of May. The UN has called the GHF's model unsafe and a breach of humanitarian in impartiality standards, which GHF denies. Executive Director of the World Peace Foundation at Tufts University Alex de Waal outlined some of the criticisms speaking to Reuters. Alex de Waal: The ration that they are providing is less than the humanitarian ration provided by the United Nations. None of the specialized services such as supplementary therapeutic feeding for malnourished children are a part of this package. These are all the reasons why the United Nations and most professional humanitarians are very critical of the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation scheme. Taylor Wilson: You can read more on ♦ Deputy US Attorney General Todd Blanche said he met Jeffrey Epstein's longtime associate, Ghislaine Maxwell, yesterday and will meet her again today. She's serving a twenty-year sentence at a federal prison in Tallahassee after a jury convicted her of sex trafficking in 2021. The meetings come as President Donald Trump and his administration face continued pressure to release additional information about the Justice Department's investigation into Epstein. But what do we know about Trump and Epstein's relationship over the years? I spoke with USA TODAY Senior National Columnist for Health and Wellness Laura Trujillo for more. Laura, thank you so much for joining me on this. Laura Trujillo: Thanks for inviting me. Taylor Wilson: Let's just start here. How did the Trump, Epstein relationship originate? Laura Trujillo: From what we understand they really became friends around 1990. This is when Epstein bought a mansion about two miles from Trump's Mar-a-Lago, which he just bought about five years before. And they both, if you think about this, were really rich guys from New York, both really doing well and two miles isn't that far apart when you're two rich guys with mansions, you end up in the same social circles. We really don't know if they were best friends or something like that. We know they ran with the same group. We know they were at dinner parties together and at different events, but we're really not sure how close they were. Taylor Wilson: You touched on this, Laura, but in terms of where they would actually hang out, we know South Florida is involved here, New York City. Was this really about Mar-a-Lago? Was it about the infamous Epstein Island? Where would they run into each other? Laura Trujillo: It seems to be both New York and Florida, mostly at Mar-a-Lago. And that's a lot of photos that we have from events at Mar-a-Lago, mostly with models, with cheerleaders, parties, that type of thing. And in New York, we don't know at this point if there were trips to Epstein Island that has not shown up yet, but we also don't have all of the files. We know that Trump was on Epstein's plane between Florida and New York, but that doesn't tell us where he went. Taylor Wilson: Laura, I know you touched on this in your piece, how are modeling agencies and beauty pageants really a part of this story and their relationship? Laura Trujillo: Mostly Trump has talked about enjoying spending time with women and young women. He really didn't make a secret of this. Epstein lived a little bit quieter than Trump. I think we know that having heard Trump, he likes to talk about it. He bragged about getting access to young women on some interviews we've heard with Howard Stern. They both were involved with modeling agencies, so Epstein invested in one. We also later learned that Epstein used scouting models as a way to procure underage girls. With Trump, he started an agency in 1999. It had a lot of legacy models, and in fact, Melania was a model there before he met her. And it did have some teen models as well. Trump also, as we know, bought beauty pageants. He owned the Miss Universe Pageant, Miss Teen Pageant, and he seemed to really like to talk about that. And we've got stories of him going into the dressing rooms at these pageants and sort of making a joke about it. But I think sometimes when you hear quotes decades later, they may ring true in a different way. Taylor Wilson: All right, so Laura, what finally led to their falling out? Laura Trujillo: We think, which this is definitely a rich guy thing, they both wanted to buy the same mansion in Palm Beach, and it turned out that Trump outbid Epstein for it. And when he outbid him, it was for $41 million. And then Trump turned around and flipped it for 95 million a few years later to a Russian billionaire. And so that's one of the things people talk about. Another is that other reports say that Epstein and Trump broke up after Ghislaine Maxwell solicited the daughter of a Mar-a-Lago member. And the father complained to Trump, and that's when Trump said he kicked Epstein out of Mar-a-Lago for being a creep, so we don't know exactly what happened, but we know that those were two things that have come up. We do know that Epstein was at Trump's wedding in 2005, but that's really the last time they've been linked. Taylor Wilson: All right, so how has Trump addressed Epstein since taking the Oval Office? Is there any difference this term also versus Trump's first term? Laura Trujillo: I have, in 2019, Trump was saying he wasn't a fan of Epstein. And at that point he also was alleging that Bill Clinton was connected to Epstein's death, so there was a real call at that time from Trump to learn more about the Epstein client list and to find out if there was this wider child abuse conspiracy. Moving forward into this term and this week, we've seen so much about Epstein just swirling around the President with the MAGA movement promising all of these revelations and Trump now seeming to say he's fine with these files being released, but we've got Republicans pushing back and so it's going to be interesting to see what happens. Taylor Wilson: Lots of developments still to come. Laura Trujillo is a senior national columnist covering health and wellness for USA TODAY. Thanks, Laura. Laura Trujillo: Thank you. ♦ Taylor Wilson: Two Republican senators are calling for the Justice Department to appoint a special counsel to investigate whether former President Barack Obama and his staff were involved in an effort to undermine Donald Trump's 2016 presidential campaign. The push by Senators Lindsey Graham and John Cornyn comes after national intelligence director, Tulsi Gabbard, in a press briefing earlier this week, alleged she had evidence the Obama administration promoted a contrived narrative that Russia interfered in the 2016 election to help Trump, arguing that it was not true. Russia did attempt to interfere in the 2016 presidential election in favor of Trump, but according to former special counsel Robert Mueller's 2019 final report and a 2020 bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee assessment. Trump has long said the investigations into his first White House campaign and its connections with Russia are a hoax. ♦ President Trump yesterday took executive action, making it easier for cities and states to remove homeless people from the streets. I spoke with USA TODAY White House correspondent Joey Garrison to learn more. Thanks for joining me, Joey. Joey Garrison: Hey, thanks for having me on. Taylor Wilson: Joey, what will this executive order do about homelessness? Joey Garrison: President Trump took executive action on Thursday signing an order that really makes it easier for cities and states really encourages them to remove homeless people from the streets and from encampments and move them over to rehabilitation and treatment centers. This is done in a couple of ways. First of all, Trump is directing his attorney general, Pam Bondi, to challenge judicial precedents both at the federal and state levels, try to reverse those precedents and consent decrees that currently limit the ability of local and state governments to remove homeless people from the streets. The order also sets forth, though this part is a little unclear, redirecting federal funds to these centers where Trump wants to move homeless people to. And it's not clear exactly how much money will be allocated for this or from where that money is going to be coming from. And also, he's ordered several federal agencies, including HHS and HUD, to start prioritizing federal grants to states and cities that prohibit homeless encampments, so this is a direct incentive for the federal government to crack down on homelessness camps. And so that's the big things that this sweeping homeless EO from Trump seeks to accomplish. Taylor Wilson: And Joey, what did we hear from the White House about why they feel this is necessary in this moment? Joey Garrison: Trump has long talked about the homeless issue in the country. He makes the comments often about Washington DC when he is driving around in the presidential vehicle he looks out the window and sees these homelessness camps. It's always been something that he's talked about. It falls under this law and order umbrella that Trump has long talked about. And there are numbers to back up, the fact that homelessness is at an all-time high in the country right now, HUD does an annual count of the number of people sleeping on the streets on a single night each year. And last January 2024 they counted over 770,000 on a single night. That was a 18% increase over the previous year. And so there is an issue, of course, with the rise of homelessness in many cities. Taylor Wilson: Wow. Trump's action here follows a major Supreme Court move as well earlier this year on homeless camps, Joey, what did they decide? Can we go back to that for a moment? Joey Garrison: Yeah, that's a huge point, what's going on in the background here. In June, just a month ago, the Supreme Court ruled that individuals can be arrested and fined for sleeping and public spaces. They upheld a homelessness ban in a City of Grant Pass, Oregon that prohibits homeless people from sleeping outdoors. In that city they have fines starting at $250 per individual as well as jail time for repeat offenses. You have this opinion, which was a six three conservative majority ruling that essentially upholds cities and states banning homelessness in their communities. And so with that authority upheld by the Supreme Court, you're seeing this real proactive executive order from Trump for cities and states to really go after homelessness in their cities. Taylor Wilson: Well, Joey, as for this week's executive order, are we hearing any pushback? What do critics say about this latest action out of the White House? Joey Garrison: Not surprisingly, a lot of homelessness advocates are condemning this, and I think there's a lot of questions here. First of all, this idea of removing people from where they live on streets to centers. There's a lot of questions whether these rehabilitation centers, whether there's enough beds to house an entire homelessness population. You look at cities on the West Coast like Los Angeles and San Francisco, which have really large numbers of homeless people. I think a lot of homeless advocates say the best way is to address the housing problem right now in this country. The affordability issue with buying a home has never been greater really than it is right now. They argue that this isn't the right way to try to tackle this problem, that it's really rather inhumane to sweep the streets of people who are living there. Taylor Wilson: Joey Garrison covers the White House for USA TODAY. Thank you, Joey. Joey Garrison: Thanks so much. ♦ Taylor Wilson: Hulk Hogan has died. Hogan, whose legal name is Terry Bollea was influential on the rise of wrestling worldwide and WWE's first major star. As WWE became the dominant wrestling company, his stardom grew and he headlined the first nine editions of WrestleMania with his most iconic moment coming at WrestleMania III in 1987. Defending the World Heavyweight Championship against longtime rival, Andre the Giant Hogan picked him up and delivered the body slam heard around the world, and his popularity spread outside the ring with appearances and TV shows and movies. He wasn't without scandal though, he testified admitting he took steroids. And then in 2015 he was caught on tape making racist comments that severely tarnished his popularity and legacy. WWE distanced itself from Hogan in the fallout, but he eventually returned to making appearances with the company in 2018. He made his last appearance for WWE in January. Hulk Hogan was 71. ♦ Thanks for listening to The Excerpt. We're produced by Shannon Rae Green and Kaely Monahan, and our executive producer is Laura Beatty. You can get the podcast wherever you get your pods, and as always, you can email us at podcasts at I'm Taylor Wilson. I'll be back tomorrow with more of The Excerpt from USA TODAY.


Los Angeles Times
37 minutes ago
- Los Angeles Times
Texas Democrats meet with Newsom to stop Trump's push to ‘rig' the 2026 election
Gov. Gavin Newsom stood alongside six Democrats from the Texas Legislature on Friday and joined them in accusing President Trump and Republicans of trying to 'rig' elections to hold onto congressional seats next year. 'They play by a different set of rules and we could sit back and act as if we have some moral authority and watch this 249-, 250-year-old experiment be washed away,' Newsom said of the nation's history. 'We are not going to allow that to happen.' The Texas lawmakers and the governor spoke with reporters after meeting privately at the Governor's Mansion in Sacramento to discuss a national political fight over electoral maps that could alter the outcome of the midterm elections and balance of power in Congress. At the urging of President Trump, Texas Gov. Greg Abbott called his state Legislature into a special session this week that includes a call to redistrict the Lone Star State to help Republicans pick up seats in Congress. The move is part of a gerrymandering effort pushed by Trump to prevent the GOP from losing control of the House of Representatives next year. If Democrats take the House, they could derail the president's agenda, which has so far included a crackdown on undocumented immigrants, tariffs on imports, rescinding efforts to combat climate change and undercutting state protections for the LGTBQ+ community, among other policy priorities. Newsom has threatened to mirror Trump's tactics and said he's in talks with leaders of the California Legislature to redraw the state's congressional districts to favor electing more Democrats and fewer Republicans. Texas Democrats, who said they traveled to California to meet with the governor and explain the state of play in Texas, pledged do everything in their power to push back against Trump's plan. 'We're going to use every tool at our disposal in the state of Texas to confront this very illegal redistricting process that is going to be done on the backs of historic African American and Latino districts,' said Texas state Rep. Rafael Anchía. Another group of Texas lawmakers are expected to meet with Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker in Chicago. Changing the maps to benefit Democrats is a massive departure from California's work over the last decade to remove political partisanship from the redistricting process. California voters in 2010 gave an independent Citizens Redistricting Commission the power to determine the boundaries of voting districts for the U.S. House of Representatives instead of leaving that authority with the state Legislature. To redistrict before the midterms, the most legally sound option is for state lawmakers to send a constitutional amendment to voters that seeks to allow changes to the voter map outside the boundaries of California's independent redistricting process. The vote would need to happen in a special election before the June primary. Newsom has said he's also exploring a potential legal loophole that could allow the California Legislature to redraw the congressional maps themselves with a two-thirds vote. The governor's office said state law charges the redistricting commission with crafting new maps after a census, which is conducted about every 10 years. But they say the law is silent on everything that happens in between that time period. Newsom's lawyers believe it could be possible for the Legislature to redistrict congressional seats mid-decade on its own without going to the ballot. The governor's call to fight Trump using his own gerrymandering tactics has drawn a mixed response. Newsom argues that Democrats will continue to lose if they remain the only party that plays by the rules. But others worry about the integrity of electoral outcomes across the nation if political parties in every state resort to naked political gamesmanship to gain control. Texas Republicans have long been accused of crafting political maps to dilute the power of Black and Latino voters, which led to an ongoing lawsuit from 2021. Newsom's effort in California would effectively seek to increase the share of Democrats in Republican-held districts. Redistricting experts in California say redrawing the maps in the Golden State could create the potential for Democrats to flip at least five of the seats held by GOP incumbents. Democrats may have the potential for greater gains from gerrymandering, particularly in places such as California that have attempted to practice nonpartisan redistricting, compared to states such as Texas, where maps are already drawn in favor of Republicans. 'It should be no surprise to anybody who covers Texas that every decade since 1970 Texas has been found to discriminate against people of color in its redistricting process,' Anchía said. 'In trying to do this, it is going to create great harm, not only to the people we represent, to the voters of the state of Texas, but also potentially to all Americans,' he said about Trump's plan. It's common for the party in control of the White House to lose seats nationally in the first election after a presidential contest. Republicans hold majorities in the Senate and the House, and losing power to Democrats could be detrimental to Trump's presidency. Trump's job approval rating dropped to a second-term low of 37% in a Gallup poll conducted earlier this month. The dip is just above his lowest approval rating ever of 34% at the end of his first term. Trump has said publicly that he thinks it's possible for Republicans to redistrict and pick up five seats in Texas, with the potential for gains in other states that redraw their maps.


The Hill
an hour ago
- The Hill
Democrat Wiley Nickel may suspend NC Senate campaign: Reports
Former Rep. Wiley Nickel (D-N.C.), who launched his campaign for Senate in April, is now mulling whether to suspend his campaign and instead enter the race for an open district attorney position in Wake County, two local stations and Semafor reported Friday. A shift from Wiley would open up the Senate field for former Gov. Roy Cooper (D), who has not yet formally launched his campaign but is expected to do so next week, Axios reported. Many Democrats are hoping for the former governor to run for a seat that is wide open after Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) announced he would not seek reelection. Wiley served one term in Congress, from 2022 to 2024, opting not to run again after his district was re-drawn to heavily favor Republicans. Nickel is instead considering entering the race for the open district attorney position in Wake County, the state's most populous, WNCN and WRAL reported. Democrats are hoping North Carolina could be a prime pickup opportunity in the upcoming midterms. The party would need to flip four seats to gain control of the upper chamber. The general election is shaping up to be a showdown between Cooper and Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Whatley, who is running with the blessing of President Trump. Tills's successful reelection bid in 2020 became the most expensive race in Senate history after a close challenge from Democrat Cal Cunningham. The Republican senator announced he would not seek reelection in June after Trump mulled backing a challenger over Tillis's opposition to the 'big, beautiful bill.' After Tillis announced he would retire, the Cook Political Report rated the race a toss-up.