Lousyana Teachers Protest Reform

Lousyana Teachers Protest Reform

My favorite governor, Bobby Jindal of Louisiana, has been cleaning up his state for several years now, cutting costs and making the entire government more efficient. His early training as a management consultant has served the public well as he applied his methods to the government. He brought Louisiana out of the dark ages in medical coverage and instituted severe ethical reforms.

Now, Governor Jindal is being attacked by union and public school teachers who fear his education reforms.

Today, the state’s education committee will act on Jindal’s proposed reforms. He has taken on all the public school teachers’ favorite perks and privileges. The unions don’t like that. His proposal includes a complete revamping of the tenure program (a redundancy in union schools), enhanced monetary compensation based on performance rather than longevity, and expansion of school choice and voucher programs. He also included some tinkering around the edges of pensions, having already made a substantial change in them through an omnibus reform bill which encompassed all government employees, teachers included.

Jindal's own extensive educational accomplishments aside, the teachers cannot validly claim that he “doesn’t understand education and teachers.” One of his major reform positions in government was in the field of education. At age 28, he was appointed president of the University of Louisiana system, the sixteenth largest such system in the United States. During his tenure, formerly skyrocketing tuition fees were stabilized, duplication of effort was cut back, topheavy administration was slashed, instructor hiring was modified in order to include objective standards beyond mere diplomas, and academic standing increased dramatically.

He now proposes to institute the same reforms for elementary and secondary education. Louisiana resembles a great many other states in that huge numbers of teachers are overpaid, underworked, and often unqualified to teach much of anything. But since they are being paid for their terrible performance, the least they could do is show up for school and make a half-hearted attempt at pretending to teach.

Instead, teachers throughout the state, and particularly union members have convinced weak-spined school administrations to cancel classes so that the “teachers” can go to Baton Rouge to protest the proposed changes. This essentially means that public employees are being converted into temporary lobbyists to advance their own miserable cause while stealing time from the students and taxpayers.

How well have they done their jobs as teachers? On national standards, one-third of Louisiana public schools scored below grade-level. Nearly half of public schools in Louisiana scored a D or F even using National Education Association standards. 4th and 8th graders were in the bottom 15% of American students in math and English. Still, these space-wasters are unable to comprehend that they are lucky to have any job at all, let alone one with a near-guarantee of a job for life and disproportionately high pay and benefits for no discernible accomplishment.

Jindal’s education spokesman Aaron Baer said the following: “When one-third of all students are below grade level, the last thing public school employees should be doing is using class time to lobby the state legislature to prevent much-needed reforms. But instead they are joining the education unions who are descending upon Baton Rouge in full force.”

Although I agree with Baer, I also have the horrible thought that the only thing worse than these useless public school teachers being away from their classes is their being in their classes, filling those young minds with lots of nonsense and very little education. I will add that I do indeed know there are some very fine public school teachers, perhaps even many such. But they do not comprise even a strong minority. Jindal’s proposed reforms are being offered precisely to protect and reward those good teachers and to cease rewarding all those bad ones.

My favorite governor, Bobby Jindal of Louisiana, has been cleaning up his state for several years now, cutting costs and making the entire government more efficient. His early training as a management consultant has served the public well as he applied his methods to the government. He brought Louisiana out of the dark ages in medical coverage and instituted severe ethical reforms.

Now, Governor Jindal is being attacked by union and public school teachers who fear his education reforms.

Today, the state’s education committee will act on Jindal’s proposed reforms. He has taken on all the public school teachers’ favorite perks and privileges. The unions don’t like that. His proposal includes a complete revamping of the tenure program (a redundancy in union schools), enhanced monetary compensation based on performance rather than longevity, and expansion of school choice and voucher programs. He also included some tinkering around the edges of pensions, having already made a substantial change in them through an omnibus reform bill which encompassed all government employees, teachers included.

Jindal's own extensive educational accomplishments aside, the teachers cannot validly claim that he “doesn’t understand education and teachers.” One of his major reform positions in government was in the field of education. At age 28, he was appointed president of the University of Louisiana system, the sixteenth largest such system in the United States. During his tenure, formerly skyrocketing tuition fees were stabilized, duplication of effort was cut back, topheavy administration was slashed, instructor hiring was modified in order to include objective standards beyond mere diplomas, and academic standing increased dramatically.

He now proposes to institute the same reforms for elementary and secondary education. Louisiana resembles a great many other states in that huge numbers of teachers are overpaid, underworked, and often unqualified to teach much of anything. But since they are being paid for their terrible performance, the least they could do is show up for school and make a half-hearted attempt at pretending to teach.

Instead, teachers throughout the state, and particularly union members have convinced weak-spined school administrations to cancel classes so that the “teachers” can go to Baton Rouge to protest the proposed changes. This essentially means that public employees are being converted into temporary lobbyists to advance their own miserable cause while stealing time from the students and taxpayers.

How well have they done their jobs as teachers? On national standards, one-third of Louisiana public schools scored below grade-level. Nearly half of public schools in Louisiana scored a D or F even using National Education Association standards. 4th and 8th graders were in the bottom 15% of American students in math and English. Still, these space-wasters are unable to comprehend that they are lucky to have any job at all, let alone one with a near-guarantee of a job for life and disproportionately high pay and benefits for no discernible accomplishment.

Jindal’s education spokesman Aaron Baer said the following: “When one-third of all students are below grade level, the last thing public school employees should be doing is using class time to lobby the state legislature to prevent much-needed reforms. But instead they are joining the education unions who are descending upon Baton Rouge in full force.”

Although I agree with Baer, I also have the horrible thought that the only thing worse than these useless public school teachers being away from their classes is their being in their classes, filling those young minds with lots of nonsense and very little education. I will add that I do indeed know there are some very fine public school teachers, perhaps even many such. But they do not comprise even a strong minority. Jindal’s proposed reforms are being offered precisely to protect and reward those good teachers and to cease rewarding all those bad ones.

Lousyana Teachers Protest Reform

View Detail

You're Not The Boss Of Me

You're Not The Boss Of Me

In some ways, I guess I’ve enjoyed the spectacle of a pseudo-intellectual, gussied-up, pretentious Chicago politician trying to pass himself off as a sophisticated man for all seasons. The man is flawless, incapable of making a mistake. He has even managed to convince a large segment of the American public that he is unflappable and tolerant of criticism. He proved otherwise this past Wednesday in Arizona.

On that day, the sweet-tempered, the ever-smiling president landed in Arizona and exposed himself for the ill-tempered and thin-skinned creature he really is. He was greeted by the Governor of Arizona, Jan Brewer, who is not known as being a fan of The One. In fact, the confrontation turned into an Obama review of Brewer’s book Scorpions for Breakfast: My Fight Against Special Interests, Liberal Media, and Cynical Politicos to Secure America’s Borders. The governor was there in her official capacity as state greeter, but she was also there to plead with the president for more border security.

Unfortunately for Brewer, Obama knew that she had written some unkind words about He Who Cannot Be Criticized. The conversation, largely out of earshot of the public and press and beneath the wings of Air Force One, was obviously heated, complete with some very visible finger-wagging on both sides. After a short exchange, the president turned his back on the governor and stormed off like a child who lost a playground match and grabbed his marbles and left.

Before he was able to get to a refreshed TelePrompter, Obama let it be known that the governor had not “treated him cordially.” Well, you have to admit, she forgot to kiss his ring as they approached each other. It was obvious that he knows that he is King of America and she is merely a provincial governor. One does not lecture the king of kings, nor write a memoir that does not sing his praises.

The governor says that before she could start a conversation, Obama stated that he was disturbed about her book. She never got to make the case for more border security. She asked him if he had read the book, but after responding that he had read “an excerpt” and stating categorically that she had committed lese majeste, he walked away from her while she was still in mid-sentence attempting to respond.

So what did the mainstream media pick up on? Pictures of Brewer’s “disrespectful finger-pointing.” The best they could say is that if she didn’t respect the man, she should at least respect the office. Well, the man has sullied the office, so I think she can be at least partially forgiven if she didn’t do proper obeisance. She is an independently-elected leader of a sovereign state, equally deserving respect which he did not grant her. Governors are servants of the people of their states, not subordinates of the emperor. If she had given him the finger instead of pointing one at him, he might have been justified in feeling he had not gotten due respect for his office.

Governors are heads of state as much as the president, and they are not in the military where his position as commander-in-chief might make the man/office mantra appropriate. The governor was there as head of her government to seek help in stopping the massive flow of illegal immigration, crime, and drug importing on the border between Mexico and Arizona. The president was there to campaign for re-election and to ignore his administration’s Mexico-US gun-running operation. Which deserves more respect?

This kind of regal displeasure treatment of his “inferiors” is getting to be a habit with Obama. After being greeted by Governor Rick Perry of Texas, Obama stormed off within less than half a minute when Perry raised the issue of border security. He fumed and fretted publicly after Governor Bobby Jindal of Louisiana dared to write the president a letter asking for some genuine work instead of talk during the Gulf oil spill disaster. He actually called Jindal a “whiner” for asking for emergency food programs while the residents of the gulf recovered.

Obama is completely incapable of understanding federalism. He sees the states as branches of the national government and governors as his lieutenants. Any word of disagreement by one of those lieutenants must be treated as disrespect for the glorious leader and rank insubordination. Well, this god has feet of clay and this emperor has no clothes (how’s that for mixing my metaphors?). Obama deserves the title of King of Cool about as much as Rosie O’Donnell deserved the title of Queen of Nice.

Update Well, I suppose this was inevitable. Now Al Sharpton, the NAACP, Joe Madison, MSNBC and a raft of left wing talk-show hosts have declared that Brewer's actions were not only disrespectful, but racist. One says that Brewer's actions were the natural fear that white women have of black men. The rest are absolutely convinced that Brewer would never had behaved this way if the president were white. One black contributor on Fox News says that she doesn't believe Brewer is a racist, but her actions are typical of white behavior toward blacks. "Typical white woman" anyone?

In some ways, I guess I’ve enjoyed the spectacle of a pseudo-intellectual, gussied-up, pretentious Chicago politician trying to pass himself off as a sophisticated man for all seasons. The man is flawless, incapable of making a mistake. He has even managed to convince a large segment of the American public that he is unflappable and tolerant of criticism. He proved otherwise this past Wednesday in Arizona.

On that day, the sweet-tempered, the ever-smiling president landed in Arizona and exposed himself for the ill-tempered and thin-skinned creature he really is. He was greeted by the Governor of Arizona, Jan Brewer, who is not known as being a fan of The One. In fact, the confrontation turned into an Obama review of Brewer’s book Scorpions for Breakfast: My Fight Against Special Interests, Liberal Media, and Cynical Politicos to Secure America’s Borders. The governor was there in her official capacity as state greeter, but she was also there to plead with the president for more border security.

Unfortunately for Brewer, Obama knew that she had written some unkind words about He Who Cannot Be Criticized. The conversation, largely out of earshot of the public and press and beneath the wings of Air Force One, was obviously heated, complete with some very visible finger-wagging on both sides. After a short exchange, the president turned his back on the governor and stormed off like a child who lost a playground match and grabbed his marbles and left.

Before he was able to get to a refreshed TelePrompter, Obama let it be known that the governor had not “treated him cordially.” Well, you have to admit, she forgot to kiss his ring as they approached each other. It was obvious that he knows that he is King of America and she is merely a provincial governor. One does not lecture the king of kings, nor write a memoir that does not sing his praises.

The governor says that before she could start a conversation, Obama stated that he was disturbed about her book. She never got to make the case for more border security. She asked him if he had read the book, but after responding that he had read “an excerpt” and stating categorically that she had committed lese majeste, he walked away from her while she was still in mid-sentence attempting to respond.

So what did the mainstream media pick up on? Pictures of Brewer’s “disrespectful finger-pointing.” The best they could say is that if she didn’t respect the man, she should at least respect the office. Well, the man has sullied the office, so I think she can be at least partially forgiven if she didn’t do proper obeisance. She is an independently-elected leader of a sovereign state, equally deserving respect which he did not grant her. Governors are servants of the people of their states, not subordinates of the emperor. If she had given him the finger instead of pointing one at him, he might have been justified in feeling he had not gotten due respect for his office.

Governors are heads of state as much as the president, and they are not in the military where his position as commander-in-chief might make the man/office mantra appropriate. The governor was there as head of her government to seek help in stopping the massive flow of illegal immigration, crime, and drug importing on the border between Mexico and Arizona. The president was there to campaign for re-election and to ignore his administration’s Mexico-US gun-running operation. Which deserves more respect?

This kind of regal displeasure treatment of his “inferiors” is getting to be a habit with Obama. After being greeted by Governor Rick Perry of Texas, Obama stormed off within less than half a minute when Perry raised the issue of border security. He fumed and fretted publicly after Governor Bobby Jindal of Louisiana dared to write the president a letter asking for some genuine work instead of talk during the Gulf oil spill disaster. He actually called Jindal a “whiner” for asking for emergency food programs while the residents of the gulf recovered.

Obama is completely incapable of understanding federalism. He sees the states as branches of the national government and governors as his lieutenants. Any word of disagreement by one of those lieutenants must be treated as disrespect for the glorious leader and rank insubordination. Well, this god has feet of clay and this emperor has no clothes (how’s that for mixing my metaphors?). Obama deserves the title of King of Cool about as much as Rosie O’Donnell deserved the title of Queen of Nice.

Update Well, I suppose this was inevitable. Now Al Sharpton, the NAACP, Joe Madison, MSNBC and a raft of left wing talk-show hosts have declared that Brewer's actions were not only disrespectful, but racist. One says that Brewer's actions were the natural fear that white women have of black men. The rest are absolutely convinced that Brewer would never had behaved this way if the president were white. One black contributor on Fox News says that she doesn't believe Brewer is a racist, but her actions are typical of white behavior toward blacks. "Typical white woman" anyone?

You're Not The Boss Of Me

View Detail

The One That Got Away

The One That Got Away

Shown are President Bobby Jindal and his lovely wife entering the White House for his inaugural ball in 2013. I can fantasize, can't I? Louisiana Governor Jindal has made it clear that he has no intention of running for the office during this election cycle, and I'm more than a little disappointed. We don't do endorsements in primary elections, but I can still extol his virtues for future reference since he simply isn't going to run this time.

Jindal's stunning reelection victory this past weekend in Louisiana created a lot of buzz in the blogosphere, including but not limited to The American Spectator and National Review. He won with a two-thirds vote in an all-party election in which he faced nine opponents. In other words, he got twice as many votes as all his opponents combined. He also won in a state which was previously heavily Democratic, and which he has helped to convert to a substantially Republican state.

So I'm going to play a little fantasy politics and tell you why I thought Jindal was the ideal candidate to beat Obama. Simply put, he steals all of those things that got Obama elected, but with the addition of real accomplishment and a genuinely conservative political point of view. The superfluous things that worked for Obama work for Jindal. He is young. He is dynamic. He's a riveting public speaker (forget that terrible response to the State of the Union address he gave two years ago). He obviously appeals to a broad spectrum of voters, including both wealthy and poor whites. Louisiana is not a microcosm of America, but the recent election certainly indicated he is a candidate who can appeal to a growingly multi-ethnic America in states that not long ago still had Jim Crow laws.

Obama would not be able to use his semi-subtle racism against Jindal, because Jindal "doesn't look like other Presidents" either. At the same time, Jindal has never used race or ethnicity to advance his cause. He truly would be a post-racial President. Older voters like myself can simply like him for all the things he is and has done, but younger voters are much more in tune with multiculturalism. Obama says "celebrate diversity." Jindal says "respect diversity, support unity." Jindal is as American as apple pie curry.

Obama constantly spoke about his education. Jindal rarely does. But the leftist intellectual elite constantly brought the subject up in the Obama/McCain election. That wouldn't happen in a Jindal/Obama matchup. Let's take a quick look. Obama attended Occidental College (definitely), Columbia University (allegedly), and moved on to become the editor of the Harvard Law Review without ever having written a single scholarly article for the Review himself. His records are sealed, and nobody seems to remember him at either Columbia or Harvard Law.

Jindal, the son of Indian immigrants, was born Piyush Jindal in Baton Rouge, but chose to be called "Bobby" from an early age. His brilliance showed early. He graduated from Baton Rouge Magnet School (for really smart kids). But he wasn't all brains. He was an accomplished tennis player. In his "spare time" he started a computer newsletter, a retail candy business, and a mail order software business. He never had a job as a community organizer. He was too busy gaining both real life experience, an understanding of business, and a remarkable education which is all public record. No sealed academic records here.

Jindal was one of fifty high school students nationally to be chosen for a special pre-medical honors program at elite Ivy League Brown University. He graduated, with honors, in two majors--public policy and biology. As a standout scholar, he was recruited by both Harvard Medical School and Yale Law School, with full scholarships to both. Instead, he chose to attend Oxford University, where he received a master's degree in political science with an emphasis in health policy. He received an award at Oxford for a thesis on "needs-based health care." He turned down a PhD scholarship program at Oxford, deciding it was time to return to the United States and get a job as a political and public health consultant with the firm of McKinsey and Company.

I think we know who would end up with the mucky end of the stick in an "I'm smarter than you" contest with the pseudo-intellectual and questionably-credentialed Obama. But early on, Jindal realized that the academic credentials were all well and good, but if he didn't want to be a college professor, it was time to get out into the real world. At age 25, Jindal was tapped by Louisiana Governor Mike Foster to be the head of Louisiana's Department of Health and Hospitals. Combining his academic credentials with a practical sense of how public money ought to be spent, Jindal spent three years at the job. When he came into the job, Louisiana DHH was experiencing a $400 million dollar deficit with Medicaid and bankruptcy. At the end of his watch, that same department had a $220 million dollar surplus.

Jindal went on to many more achievements, using government to promote and bolster private investment and innovation before being elected America's first Indian-American governor. In the deep South, no less. As a Congressman, he had earned rave reviews, even from Democrats, for his involvement in private enterprise solutions to the Katrina disaster. He rolled up his sleeves as governor, and personally oversaw the relief efforts after hurricane Gustav, and took on Obama for the President's failure to do anything more than talk about the BP oil spill. He had proposed works projects which may have prevented much of the spill from arriving on Louisiana shores, but got zero cooperation from the federal government.

Compare Jindal's Louisiana to Obama's DC. Lately, it seems like a scandal erupts two or three times a week on Obama's watch. He uses back door politics and Chicago-style thuggery to get his way. His Justice Department is a politicized, racialized mess, and his Attorney General is apparently complicit in the sneaky Fast and Furious operation which turned deadly. Louisiana, on the other hand, had been one of the crookedest states in the union, with its most famous demagogue Huey P. Long planning to run for President. Jindal himself has never been touched by personal or political scandal, and his administration cleaned up the state house and the legislature with new and seriously-enforced ethics rules.

Jindal has a fine way of being very conservative, but without appearing to be overly-partisan. He seems to be able to whip Democrats into line without making grandstand headlines about how he conquered the "enemy." He defeats recalcitrant legislators by persuasion and savvy political maneuvering. He appears boyish while possessing the political acumen of a very experienced old pol.

On top of it all, Jindal can deride Obamacare from both the intellectual and practical high ground. His experience with Louisiana's DHH and his position as Bill Clinton's Medicare commission chairman give him bipartisan credentials as the man who could come up with a genuine solution for the medically uninsured without the dangerous economic consequences of Obamacare. He favors interstate contracts and portable insurance from state to state while opening the market to private insurers across state lines. As Quinn Hillyer said in his American Spectator article, "he can explain 'premium support' and market solutions better than anyone in the business, especially in a debate, where--unlike a formal speech setting (remember the State of the Union response)--Jindal absolutely sparkles." Jindal is a true policy wonk without sounding the least bit wonkish.

Jindal has proven himself to be an economic conservative cost-cutter and efficiency-increaser. He also has solid social conservative views, but doesn't spend valuable time beating opponents over the head with the Bible. Again, he persuades and maneuvers rather than making a donnybrook out of the issues. But he knows that the economy will be the true issue for his state and the national government at election time. The libertarian/conservative CATO Institute gave Jindal an "A" on fiscal policy, citing the increase in efficient Louisiana public services while cutting state spending by 26%. He has bent on a few interim special taxes in order to bring legislators into his fold, but his basic philosophy is to reduce taxes, increase efficiency, cut spending. He has succeeded at all three.

Before the current candidates announced their intentions to run, I had visions of Jindal wiping the floor with Obama in debates on the economy, statism, and rabid egalitarianism. I won't get that chance now. Jindal has declared in no uncertain terms that he will not seek the presidency in 2012. To prove his steadfastness in avoiding the nomination, he has endorsed fellow Governor Rick Perry. I'll keep my own counsel on that choice, but I would rather have seen Jindal do it for himself and all of us. Maybe next time.

Shown are President Bobby Jindal and his lovely wife entering the White House for his inaugural ball in 2013. I can fantasize, can't I? Louisiana Governor Jindal has made it clear that he has no intention of running for the office during this election cycle, and I'm more than a little disappointed. We don't do endorsements in primary elections, but I can still extol his virtues for future reference since he simply isn't going to run this time.

Jindal's stunning reelection victory this past weekend in Louisiana created a lot of buzz in the blogosphere, including but not limited to The American Spectator and National Review. He won with a two-thirds vote in an all-party election in which he faced nine opponents. In other words, he got twice as many votes as all his opponents combined. He also won in a state which was previously heavily Democratic, and which he has helped to convert to a substantially Republican state.

So I'm going to play a little fantasy politics and tell you why I thought Jindal was the ideal candidate to beat Obama. Simply put, he steals all of those things that got Obama elected, but with the addition of real accomplishment and a genuinely conservative political point of view. The superfluous things that worked for Obama work for Jindal. He is young. He is dynamic. He's a riveting public speaker (forget that terrible response to the State of the Union address he gave two years ago). He obviously appeals to a broad spectrum of voters, including both wealthy and poor whites. Louisiana is not a microcosm of America, but the recent election certainly indicated he is a candidate who can appeal to a growingly multi-ethnic America in states that not long ago still had Jim Crow laws.

Obama would not be able to use his semi-subtle racism against Jindal, because Jindal "doesn't look like other Presidents" either. At the same time, Jindal has never used race or ethnicity to advance his cause. He truly would be a post-racial President. Older voters like myself can simply like him for all the things he is and has done, but younger voters are much more in tune with multiculturalism. Obama says "celebrate diversity." Jindal says "respect diversity, support unity." Jindal is as American as apple pie curry.

Obama constantly spoke about his education. Jindal rarely does. But the leftist intellectual elite constantly brought the subject up in the Obama/McCain election. That wouldn't happen in a Jindal/Obama matchup. Let's take a quick look. Obama attended Occidental College (definitely), Columbia University (allegedly), and moved on to become the editor of the Harvard Law Review without ever having written a single scholarly article for the Review himself. His records are sealed, and nobody seems to remember him at either Columbia or Harvard Law.

Jindal, the son of Indian immigrants, was born Piyush Jindal in Baton Rouge, but chose to be called "Bobby" from an early age. His brilliance showed early. He graduated from Baton Rouge Magnet School (for really smart kids). But he wasn't all brains. He was an accomplished tennis player. In his "spare time" he started a computer newsletter, a retail candy business, and a mail order software business. He never had a job as a community organizer. He was too busy gaining both real life experience, an understanding of business, and a remarkable education which is all public record. No sealed academic records here.

Jindal was one of fifty high school students nationally to be chosen for a special pre-medical honors program at elite Ivy League Brown University. He graduated, with honors, in two majors--public policy and biology. As a standout scholar, he was recruited by both Harvard Medical School and Yale Law School, with full scholarships to both. Instead, he chose to attend Oxford University, where he received a master's degree in political science with an emphasis in health policy. He received an award at Oxford for a thesis on "needs-based health care." He turned down a PhD scholarship program at Oxford, deciding it was time to return to the United States and get a job as a political and public health consultant with the firm of McKinsey and Company.

I think we know who would end up with the mucky end of the stick in an "I'm smarter than you" contest with the pseudo-intellectual and questionably-credentialed Obama. But early on, Jindal realized that the academic credentials were all well and good, but if he didn't want to be a college professor, it was time to get out into the real world. At age 25, Jindal was tapped by Louisiana Governor Mike Foster to be the head of Louisiana's Department of Health and Hospitals. Combining his academic credentials with a practical sense of how public money ought to be spent, Jindal spent three years at the job. When he came into the job, Louisiana DHH was experiencing a $400 million dollar deficit with Medicaid and bankruptcy. At the end of his watch, that same department had a $220 million dollar surplus.

Jindal went on to many more achievements, using government to promote and bolster private investment and innovation before being elected America's first Indian-American governor. In the deep South, no less. As a Congressman, he had earned rave reviews, even from Democrats, for his involvement in private enterprise solutions to the Katrina disaster. He rolled up his sleeves as governor, and personally oversaw the relief efforts after hurricane Gustav, and took on Obama for the President's failure to do anything more than talk about the BP oil spill. He had proposed works projects which may have prevented much of the spill from arriving on Louisiana shores, but got zero cooperation from the federal government.

Compare Jindal's Louisiana to Obama's DC. Lately, it seems like a scandal erupts two or three times a week on Obama's watch. He uses back door politics and Chicago-style thuggery to get his way. His Justice Department is a politicized, racialized mess, and his Attorney General is apparently complicit in the sneaky Fast and Furious operation which turned deadly. Louisiana, on the other hand, had been one of the crookedest states in the union, with its most famous demagogue Huey P. Long planning to run for President. Jindal himself has never been touched by personal or political scandal, and his administration cleaned up the state house and the legislature with new and seriously-enforced ethics rules.

Jindal has a fine way of being very conservative, but without appearing to be overly-partisan. He seems to be able to whip Democrats into line without making grandstand headlines about how he conquered the "enemy." He defeats recalcitrant legislators by persuasion and savvy political maneuvering. He appears boyish while possessing the political acumen of a very experienced old pol.

On top of it all, Jindal can deride Obamacare from both the intellectual and practical high ground. His experience with Louisiana's DHH and his position as Bill Clinton's Medicare commission chairman give him bipartisan credentials as the man who could come up with a genuine solution for the medically uninsured without the dangerous economic consequences of Obamacare. He favors interstate contracts and portable insurance from state to state while opening the market to private insurers across state lines. As Quinn Hillyer said in his American Spectator article, "he can explain 'premium support' and market solutions better than anyone in the business, especially in a debate, where--unlike a formal speech setting (remember the State of the Union response)--Jindal absolutely sparkles." Jindal is a true policy wonk without sounding the least bit wonkish.

Jindal has proven himself to be an economic conservative cost-cutter and efficiency-increaser. He also has solid social conservative views, but doesn't spend valuable time beating opponents over the head with the Bible. Again, he persuades and maneuvers rather than making a donnybrook out of the issues. But he knows that the economy will be the true issue for his state and the national government at election time. The libertarian/conservative CATO Institute gave Jindal an "A" on fiscal policy, citing the increase in efficient Louisiana public services while cutting state spending by 26%. He has bent on a few interim special taxes in order to bring legislators into his fold, but his basic philosophy is to reduce taxes, increase efficiency, cut spending. He has succeeded at all three.

Before the current candidates announced their intentions to run, I had visions of Jindal wiping the floor with Obama in debates on the economy, statism, and rabid egalitarianism. I won't get that chance now. Jindal has declared in no uncertain terms that he will not seek the presidency in 2012. To prove his steadfastness in avoiding the nomination, he has endorsed fellow Governor Rick Perry. I'll keep my own counsel on that choice, but I would rather have seen Jindal do it for himself and all of us. Maybe next time.

The One That Got Away

View Detail