An Outsider’s Perspective on Louisiana Politics

By Elai Levinson, Louisiana State University student & Louisiana Progress College Fellow

I chose to apply to Louisiana State University in part because my grandfather attended school there in the mid-1940s, and they gave me the financial opportunity to do so. It’s been a great experience so far, but, despite having lived in Louisiana for a few years, I still feel like an outsider. I tend to feel apprehensive about answering the question: “Where are you from?” especially when I’m at the state Capitol, not because I am ashamed of my upbringing, but because I quickly learned during my first months as a Louisiana Progress College Fellow that citing data and research from a blue state such as New York, Massachusetts, Oregon, or especially my home state of California, was a sure-fire way to have a bill die in a committee. 

I understand that some Louisianians are uncomfortable with the idea of outsiders from anywhere, and the California Bay Area in particular, coming into the state and working in politics. But I’ve fallen in love with Louisiana, and have been able to witness and participate in many important Louisiana political moments in 2024, from the redistricting special session to the crime special session to the regular legislative session. 

During those sessions, there’s one specific day that stands out to me as an example of what I’ve seen and learned. My experiences on Wednesday, April 24, served as an encapsulation of many of the things I saw and learned over the course of the year.

I had planned ahead of time to visit the Capitol that Wednesday, and worked on my school assignments ahead of time so that I could be there for the whole day. I began the day at the House & Governmental Affairs committee for the hearing on House Bill 800, which called for a state constitutional convention. I was able to sit close and listen to testimony from many people, several of whom pointed out flaws in the bill. 

They claimed it would be a rushed convention, and that Louisiana Governor Jeff Landry and other supporters of the convention had been vague about which parts of the existing constitution they were interested in removing. Despite the convincing testimony coming from credible witnesses, the committee voted in favor of the bill, along party lines, with nine Republican yays and five Democratic nays. The bill would later pass in the House Appropriations committee, and then on the House Floor, which was the final vote before sending it to the state senate for their approval. 

It concerned me that the testimony did not appear to sway the decisions of the committee members. With very few exceptions, one can predict how a vote on a bill will go just by looking at the political parties of the committee members. I aspire to keep working in Louisiana politics, and would like to hope that testifying in front of a committee is more than just a procedural act. However, based on what I’ve seen, testimony rarely affects the outcome of a vote.

Following that hearing, I headed to the Senate Labor & Industrial Relations committee to watch the hearing on Senate Bill 173 by Senator Gary Carter, which sought to implement a minimum wage in Louisiana and gradually raise that minimum wage over time. Unfortunately, though unsurprisingly, the bill failed to pass through the committee, with approximately 57 minutes passing from the moment it was introduced to the moment the vote on the bill concluded. I later learned that it has become an annual tradition for minimum wage increases to be proposed and killed in committee. I was still frustrated that a seemingly benign, common-sense bill that would establish a minimum wage of $10 in 2025 was dismissed without being given the time of day. 

Finally, on the House floor, they were considering House Bill 156 by Rep. Roger Wilder III for final passage. This bill, which proposed removing mandatory lunch/rest breaks for minors who work a shift of at least five hours, drew the attention of social media, as well as state and national news outlets. One notable moment on this bill occurred six days prior, when it was heard in the House Labor and Industrial Committee. Upon receiving pushback from Rep. Tammy Phelps, Rep. Wilder retorted at the 1:43:27 mark: “The wording is: ‘We’re here to harm children.’ That’s the wording. Gimme a break, I mean these are young adults.” It is worth mentioning that Rep. Wilder III owns several Smoothie King franchises across Louisiana where he employs teenage workers. 

The day before the House floor vote, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, posted a link on X, formerly Twitter, to an MSNBC article on the bill, with the caption, “Why are elected Republicans becoming indistinguishable from villains in a Charles Dickens novel?” While the caption appears to be fairly innocuous political banter, the fact that it came from Hillary Clinton, who for years has been Public Enemy #1 in the eyes of right-wing America, may very well have emboldened Rep. Wilder’s position, as well as brought in support from his colleagues. 

On the day of the floor vote, at the 2:53:00 mark, Wilder pulls out a printed screenshot of the Clinton tweet and says, “I was flattered yesterday when First Lady Hillary Clinton decided to chime in and wanted to compare us to Charles Dickens’ novels and villains and all this….” Then, at the 3:13:00 mark of the video, Rep. Mike Bayham speaks and prefaces his question with congratulations for receiving condemnation from Hillary Clinton, remarking, “It is certain to pass now.” And while this comment was met with some laughter, I couldn’t help but think that perhaps some Republicans voted in favor just to stick it to the Clintons. After all, the bill was not universally supported by House Republicans, with six of them voting against it. 

I visited the Capitol many times during this session, and when reviewing my notes from each day, April 24th stood out among the rest, especially for how theatrical it was. In the wake of the recent controversy over Rep. Dodie Horton’s 10 Commandments bill, some legislators have been jumping on the opportunity to boost their popularity. In June, for example, Rep. Lauren Ventrella appeared on CNN, arguing with host Boris Sanchez on the bill.

I expect some may think that I’m out of line weighing in on Louisiana politics due to my home state. And I acknowledge that Louisiana has distinct differences to states such as California and New York, but when Governor Landry and state legislators are appearing in national headlines for their theatrics and controversial legislation, people from across the country will take notice. 

I’ve seen a few shifts from last year’s session to this year’s. Testimony appears to be growing into a more symbolic gesture, as the political climate at the Capitol has grown hyper-partisan. Too many legislators have prioritized publicity over policy, with an emphasis on sensationalism instead of solutions. This is not a new phenomenon, as America has been dealing with Marjorie Taylor Greene, Lauren Boebert, Matt Gaetz, and others like them for several years. However, I had hoped that this trend was only at the national level, and wouldn’t reach Louisiana. 

My plea to Louisiana politicians is to not continue down the “influencer” path, and instead put bipartisanship, common sense, and morality first. Again, while some may think that my language in this piece has been informed by California/liberal bias (and of course some of it has–no one is without biases), a lot of these opinions were formed over the course of this year’s legislative session, and by my experiences on days like April 24.