It’s been quite a while since I wrote about Gov. John Bel Edwards' disappointed dad face — that look he used to get back in his first term when some legislators played political games rather than working in good faith to fix the budget crisis they’d all inherited.
The financial picture this year couldn’t be further from that not-so-long-ago-time. Indeed, in his news conference after the close of the legislative session Thursday night, Edwards noted that “we went from debating how to make up for a $2 billion deficit to figuring out how to appropriate $2 billion while we had $2 billion in the bank. And I can tell you from my experience, that I prefer the latter, rather than the former.”
And yet, there was that face again Thursday night. And rightfully so.
Along with thanking lawmakers in the majority-Republican Legislature for working with him to make progress on multiple fronts, the Democratic governor served up a good old-fashioned talking-to.
Some of his displeasure was aimed at the conference committee that inexplicably lopped $100 million off the Department of Health budget in the session’s closing minutes. This cut, which could cost even more because state funds are often used to draw down federal matches, was not proposed ahead of session and was never vetted in committee. It just appeared at the 11th hour, blindsiding most legislators and the governor himself.
“Unconscionable” in a time of plenty, he called the development. No argument here.
From there, he pivoted to the larger challenge of growing partisanship, expressed not just in the budget battle but in a raft of cookie-cutter social-issue bills pushed by conservative Republicans.
“We're not Washington, D.C. yet, (but) we're moving in that direction. And that is not a good thing,” Edwards said. “I think debate can be helpful. That's how we work through difficult situations and come to a compromise and ultimately serve the people that we were elected to serve. But when partisan national talking points that really have no bearing on our state — they don't really emanate from any issues that we're facing or any problems that need to be solved here — when they come to Louisiana, they interfere with a lot that we have going on.”
Case in point: Three intensely debated bills targeting transgender children, all of which passed with substantial legislative majorities.
Edwards said Thursday that he expects to veto all three: one that would outlaw gender-affirming care for minors, including surgery that even the bill's proponents couldn't show had been performed here; one that would ban talk of gender and sex in schools; and one that would allow teachers to ignore students' requests to be addressed by alternate pronouns.
And he issued a stern lecture on the topic of targeting at-risk kids for political gain, predicting that history will judge the bills’ advocates the same way it views those who fought against civil rights advances in the 1950s.
“My message is not to Republicans, it's not to Democrats, it's not to independents, it’s to everybody in Louisiana: Let's pay attention to what we're doing. Let's focus on the real problems. Let's try to unite, not divide. Let’s not pick on very small minorities who happen to be comprised of the most vulnerable, fragile children in our state, those most likely to engage in suicidal ideation and suicidal attempts.
"There's nothing great in that. That's not what we should aspire to. We're better than that,” he said.
Powerful words, for those willing to listen.
A governor isn’t a parent, obviously, but the job does come with a giant bully pulpit, and whether the person in the office squanders his or her moral authority matters.
It’s easy to list those who instead put divisive national issues first, not just Edwards’ peers in other state capitols but his predecessor, Bobby Jindal (how’d that work out for him, and for his constituents, again?).
A Democrat in a red state, Edwards never had the option of fully engaging in partisan warfare, but he also doesn’t seem to have the inclination. This has benefited Louisiana.
As Edwards’ time winds down, it’s worth surveying the field of potential successors and asking: Will the state’s next governor even try to appeal to voters’ better angels, to focus on solving real problems instead of scoring cheap political points?
And what would Louisiana lose if he or she doesn’t?