The State of Freedom by Chris Alexander & Danielle Walker

June 26, 2025 #312 2025 Legislative Wrap-Up Part 4

Danielle Walker and Chris Alexander dive deep into the real heartbeat of Louisiana’s 2025 legislative session. Health freedom? Under fire. Parental rights? On the line. Abortion, insurance reform, infrastructure—it’s all here, but not in soundbites. Expect unfiltered takes, bold faith, and unapologetic truth.

From fluoride in your water to Ivermectin at the pharmacy, this episode unpacks the controversial, the spiritual, and the absolutely essential. Danielle and Chris pull no punches while challenging the political status quo and uplifting the fight for personal liberties.

It’s not just policy—it’s war for your rights. And they're on the front lines.

This episode will leave you fired up, spiritually grounded, and asking one question: Are you ready to stand firm?

Keywords: legislation, health freedom, parental rights, abortion, personal liberties, insurance reform, DOTD, infrastructure, spiritual encouragement, Louisiana politics.

SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY:

John 1:1-5 TPT

ACTION & INFO FROM TODAY'S EPISODE:

Take action on the most critical bills needing the Governor's signature or veto now: https://www.lacag.org/action-center and send the link to friends & family.

SUPPORT US & GET CONNECTED:

Want to support The State of Freedom?
- Remember to Subscribe, Like, and keep Sharing the State of Freedom podcast – it helps! Follow us on Rumble and X.
- Support the show with a financial gift if you are able: https://www.freedomstate.us/support-the-show.
- Shop our partners & help make TSOF sustainable!
- - Order Slenderiiz today: https://partner.co/s/NmM3ZGU1NmQ2
  - Shop other natural & wellness products: https://partner.co/?custid=N7183285
  - Sign up for Legal Shield or ID Shield: https://tsofpodcast.legalshieldassociate.com
  - For more information on investing in precious metals at the best prices on the market, email [email protected]. Put Metal Stacks in the subject line.
  - Planning to purchase a Starlink device? Order through our referral link & we'll both get one month of service for free! https://www.starlink.com/residential?referral=RC-2291754-20667-66
  - Order General Flynn's movie - Flynn - Deliver the Truth. Whatever the Cost. Click here: https://www.flynnmovie.com/tsofpodcast or visit www.freedomstate.us.
- If you'd like to advertise with the show, send an email to [email protected] and make the subject line TSOF Advertising.
Want to help LACAG's efforts?
- Sign up for the action center and stay updated: https://www.lacag.org/action-center
- Join LACAG and help bring Louisiana out of the swamp: https://www.lacag.org/give

KEY POINTS:

Chapters

00:00 Introduction and Overview of Legislative Session

04:07 Spiritual Reflections and Personal Convictions

07:05 Health Freedom and Legislative Developments

09:51 Parental Rights in Medical Decisions

12:58 Fluoride in Water Systems and Public Health

16:10 Food Quality and Children's Health

18:52 Over-the-Counter Ivermectin Legislation

21:56 Abortion Legislation and Ethical Considerations

37:27 Legal Implications of Abortion Legislation

44:03 Personal Liberties and the Right to Display the Flag

50:03 Inspection Stickers and Personal Freedom

52:29 Religious Institutions and Equal Treatment

54:37 Gold and Silver as Currency

01:03:24 Cell Phone Legislation and Government Overreach

01:07:30 Transforming the Department of Transportation

01:09:17 Legislative Updates and Governor's Actions

01:12:20 Insurance Rates and Tort Reform Discussion

01:14:40 Impact of Collateral Source Bill on Insurance

01:15:41 Governor's Vetoes and Legislative Controversies

01:20:11 Insurance Commissioner Powers and Accountability

01:23:41 Political Implications of Recent Insurance Legislation

01:26:47 Reflections on Legislative Session Outcomes

01:33:06 Future Directions and Upcoming Guests

01:41:57 Outro + Listener Supported Ad.mp4

CREDITS:

Music by MarkJuly from Pixabay

Sound effects by Pixabay

Ad music by Top-Flow, AudioCoffee & penguinmusic on Pixabay

Produced by: We Live Legend

TRANSCRIPT:

Danielle Walker (00:01.136)

Happy Thursday, everyone. Welcome to the State of Freedom. I'm Danielle Walker and I'm joined by my razor sharp co-host, Chris Alexander. Today is part four, the final episode to wrap up this legislative session. We are pre-recording this because of some travel. So if anything we talk about today here changes, we'll keep you posted on social media. Be sure to follow Lecag and the State of Freedom on Facebook, Instagram and X.

On X, LACAG is LACAG org and the state of freedom is Freedom State US. So be sure and give us a follow there. Well, today we've got a lot of ground to cover. We're going to delve into some of the health freedom issues. We're going to talk about some of the developments that happened on abortion, personal liberties, DOTD, and insurance and tort reform. So we've got a smorgasbord for you here today.

Before we get into the nitty-gritty, let me read the scripture of the day, bring some encouragement to you folks and ourselves. We're going to start out here in John chapter 1, verses 1 through 5. And it says, in the very beginning, the living expression was already there. And the living expression was with God, yet fully God. They were together face to face in the very beginning.

And through his creative inspiration, this living expression made all things, for nothing has existence apart from him. Life came into being because of him, for his life is light for all humanity. And this living expression is the light that bursts through the gloom, the light that darkness could not diminish. And it can be so easy sometimes to be baited and tricked.

into a place of despair or a feeling of loneliness and isolation and Look that may be a symptom of watching too much news dwelling too much on the past or looking at our problems and allowing them to be bigger in our eyes than Our God the creator of heaven and earth and all that's in it But this scripture is a great reminder of the spiritual reality. It speaks to the reality of the presence of God and the Father God the Father and Jesus

Danielle Walker (02:21.582)

It speaks to the community and connectedness they shared from the very beginning. And it reminds us that God's essence is creativity, light and life and love and his desire is to be in connection with us. This is the kind of scripture that will push out those dark thoughts and those dark moments and allow us to regain our perspective and move forward in boldness and confidence that there's nothing in our life that's new to the Lord.

and there's nothing that his light cannot heal or repair or change. We just need to meditate on the word and rehearse it to ourselves until it gets inside of us and allow it to change our perspective.

Chris, you're on mute, hun.

Chris Alexander (03:10.829)

The light that bursts through the gloom, I love that. That's so powerful. And there really is no substitute, Danielle, for having that feeling of peace and joy that comes from God's grace, and it's only His grace. There's no substitute. And on one level, I used to think that it must have been very difficult for

Danielle Walker (03:14.404)

And that's so good.

Chris Alexander (03:40.664)

people who turn their back on the world and go and serve Christ exclusively their whole lives and fix their attention and their gaze on the things of heaven instead of the things of earth. I used to think that must be very difficult, but I have felt in my life and very recently I have felt, like in the last 24 hours, I have felt the sort of joy and peace

that comes from having that deep conviction that you really can't explain in rational terms that Christ is with me and that he is in me and that there is nothing to fear and nothing to worry about and he has a deep and intimate love for me and concern for me. And having that realization really does lift all of the burdens of the world.

off of you because deep down inside you know that he has everything and everything is going to be okay. And there's just no substitute for having that conviction and knowing that. And it's only God's grace. And you're so right, Danielle. It is a light that bursts forth from the gloom. Like in the first, I think the third sentence of the Gospel of John, one or two of top sentences there,

In the beginning, the word was God, the word became flesh and the darkness has not overcome it. I just find that so powerful and so humbling to think about that.

Danielle Walker (05:17.327)

Yeah.

Danielle Walker (05:25.678)

Yeah, it's beautiful. And Paul says it in Corinthians this way, Christ in you, the hope of glory. And so good.

Chris Alexander (05:34.572)

Yes. And when Paul says he's going through his life and all of the things that he's been through, and he counts it all rubbish, in fact, he glories in it. He said, do whatever you want to do, but let me always attain to Christ. That is the voice of someone who knows deep down inside what it feels like to know the Savior, to deeply know the Savior.

that nobody who does not know the Savior intimately could have said those words.

Danielle Walker (06:12.046)

Yeah, and you know what else, Chris? It's not just that he knew the Savior, which is massive and probably 90 % of the game, but he also was doing what he was called to do. And there's a big part of that, that we were created for a purpose in the earth and we can't have that kind of fulfillment.

if we don't step into purpose. And so I think there's a marriage there, you know, you have to know whose you are and you have to know why you're here.

Chris Alexander (06:46.711)

who you are and why you're here. And there are, Danielle, many in the world, many in our own community who are going through life, doing things, engaged in activities, even their professional lives that really are not what God deeply has called them to be doing. And I think that's a big part of the reason why many people are very unhappy in their professional work, because they're not really doing...

God's work insofar as what he called them to be and to do. But it's never too late to return to God personally, professionally, and begin to do what he's calling us to do. So don't lose hope. Abraham, Daniel, Abraham was 75 years old when he led the Jews into the Cana. It's 75. And it the altar there in Bethel, I think.

It's, God can do anything he wants to do, and he can do it however and whenever and however quickly he wants to do it. So we have to remember that. Never lose hope with a willing vessel. Exactly.

Danielle Walker (07:54.566)

That's right. With a willing vessel.

Danielle Walker (08:01.476)

Yeah. All right. Well, I think that's a great place for us to start. We can talk about some health freedom stuff here. And I know the author of House Bill 112, Representative Kathy Edmonston is a willing vessel for the Lord. And she has been a great representative for her constituents over there in Ascension. She authored this bill, but it didn't get too far. And this was a bill that would have

kind of codified the idea that prescribing off-label drugs is permissible. Prescribing them, dispensing them, administering them, it would have permitted all of that by law. Unfortunately, it never got brought to committee.

Chris Alexander (08:51.285)

It never got brought to committee. according to Dr. Abraham, you and I were talking about this pre-show. It was because in his view, it's really not an issue now because doctors already have the authority to prescribe, you know, off-label drugs. But the impetus behind the bill was so that we never have another COVID. We never have another situation where doctors are vilified.

retaliated against and oppressed by medical boards or even the state of Louisiana, LDH, because they are using innovative ways based on their knowledge and skill to treat patients for various things with FDA approved medication that perhaps have not been approved for that specific purpose. Doctors have always had that right, but it's a right that was not recognized, unfortunately.

Danielle Walker (09:42.191)

Yeah.

Chris Alexander (09:46.328)

during COVID, and a lot of doctors suffered a lot because of that, because they were trying to do the right thing. So, you know, I respect Representative Edmondson for not bringing the bill, particularly if Dr. Abraham advised against it. But nonetheless, we can never forget what the state experienced during COVID and what doctors and providers experienced during COVID. And if they hadn't experienced the suppression of those early therapeutics and been

vilified for prescribing or trying to prescribe those medications, there would be a lot of people alive right now who are not. And I think it's very sad. And if we can never forget the lessons of history so that we don't ever repeat those mistakes.

Danielle Walker (10:33.358)

Yeah, you're so right. And I think one lesson that we've learned and plan with all that was within us to adhere to is do not comply. Right? I mean, if someone is trying to get you to do something, particularly the government or an employer, to do something that goes against your conscience or your God given rights, your constitutional rights, you have stand your ground and say no. And Chris, we can't forget.

that all of that goes back, excuse me, all of that goes back to the desire of the deep state to steal the 2020 election. If there would not have been an insidious plan to steal the election, COVID would have never happened. COVID was part of the plan. COVID was not the plan in and of itself. COVID was a means to an end to steal the election. And no one can convince me otherwise until there's some evidence to prove me wrong, but that's-

I believe that in my heart of hearts. And so it takes us back to the core issue of the entire world that we're facing right now, which is if we do not fix our elections, we have every reason to believe that any of this stuff can happen again.

Chris Alexander (11:51.131)

Absolutely, it can happen again and even with greater fervor and greater aggression than it did before. If we don't put in place a mechanism to prevent it and certainly if we forget it, people have a tendency to have very short memories, Danielle, which is why in history you'll see the same brutality, the same oppression, the same

Danielle Walker (11:58.747)

Yeah.

Chris Alexander (12:18.525)

government overreach and abuse and tyranny occurring almost in a cyclical pattern because people forget and that's why knowing history is so important and understanding the lessons of history that can never be allowed to happen again in the state of Louisiana ever where a doctor is second-guessed vilified sanctioned reprimanded and ostracized simply for practicing medicine and that's exactly what occurred

And so we have to keep an eye on this. And I certainly hope it's never an issue again. But I would not be at all disappointed if Kathy Edmondson brought this bill again next year.

Danielle Walker (12:55.099)

Yeah.

Danielle Walker (13:00.804)

Yeah, me too. Me too. All right. Here's a bill that was another bite at the apple again, just like the previous one. This one made it a little bit further, but did not take off. And that's House Bill 400 by Representative Emily Shinovier. We talked about this bill pretty extensively during the session. This would restore parental rights when it comes to minors.

their minor children's medical procedures and treatments. The fact that this did not move and make it all the way through with a conservative, quote unquote, conservative super majority should tell the people of this state a lot.

Chris Alexander (13:44.29)

Yeah, you know, it simply repeals the law that allows minors to get surgical and medical treatment without the knowledge or consent of their parent or guardian in Louisiana. It's like this absolutely has to has to change. You got it. You got to change this provision of law. And that's what Representative Schennevere was trying to do. And unfortunately, over on the Senate side and the Senate Health and Welfare Committee, there were questions raised about what the term

in loco parenti means when you have an adult who's acting as a parent for a limited period of time or for a limited purpose and whether or not that parent would have the authority to allow medical treatment or surgical procedures that the biological parents would, you know, don't know about, you know, and so that sort of thing. Also that was concerned.

Danielle Walker (14:36.122)

But that seems like it would be easy enough to overcome with just some spelling it out in the bill, right?

Chris Alexander (14:42.537)

Exactly. Which is exactly why, Danielle, it was our position that this bill did not need to be killed over that objection. It also didn't need to be killed over what I thought was a legitimate objection by Senator Katrina Jackson, basically saying it looks like based in the language of the bill, that you're actually broadening a minor's freedom to secure abortion services without the

consent or knowledge of the parents. Whereas the law now basically only allows that for birth and delivery, but you're actually broadening it. So, and Emily agreed with her and said, I'd love to tighten the language up. We can also tighten the language up on loco parenti. That could have been done in committee, Danielle, or it could have been done on the floor and should have been in light of the principle at stake here, which is that parents have a right to know.

Danielle Walker (15:18.16)

Yeah.

Chris Alexander (15:39.07)

what is going on with their children and specifically when they're seeking medical treatment or medical intervention. That's just a no brainer. I think it's very unfortunate that the bill was killed in committee and I'm not entirely convinced that it wasn't killed for other reasons that had not much to do really with the objections that were expressed by committee members, including Senator McMath and Senator Luna. Senator McMath should have insisted that that bill was amended in committee.

and gotten onto the Senate floor and voted on. We shouldn't be waiting another year without clarity in the law on this issue. It's too important.

Danielle Walker (16:16.388)

Yeah, yeah, I agree with you. And Chris, were there any, any one testifying or any organizations testifying against the bill and committee that you saw?

Chris Alexander (16:26.861)

I think there were a couple of people testifying against it who remained concerned about whether or not children who were the subjects of abuse by their guardians or by their parents, would they have to let their parents know that they're... But that language was cleared up in the bill and it really wasn't a problem.

I'm just curious, and I'm going to put my thinking hat on, to try to figure out what is the real reason why there would be opposition to a bill like this in principle? What's the reason for that? Is it because there are sinister forces in our society and our community who do not want parents or guardians to be involved in their children's medical care? Are they trying to drive a wedge between parents and children?

Danielle Walker (17:08.783)

Yes.

Chris Alexander (17:20.51)

alienate them from each other. Is that it?

Danielle Walker (17:23.44)

All of that, all of that. I believe all of that, Chris. If you remember back to when Representative Gabe Firmett brought his bill to stop the transgender nonsense in the state when it comes to minor children, one of the biggest organizations doing that was Children's Hospital. Well, one thing that we talked to, I don't know if it was Representative Firmett or others in the legislature about at that time, was the fact that

there are ways to code on Medicaid and Medicare, whichever one is for the kids, sorry, I always confuse the two, to move forward with those procedures under the cover, under the guise of something else, right? Like a breast reduction surgery or some kind of, I don't know what all they use, but all that to say, they can't.

If the parents were involved, I would say nine times out of 10, that stuff would not be going on. And I bet that there's still sinister forces in our state that are trying to push that through.

Chris Alexander (18:30.219)

Yeah. And Jay Luna got into an argument with Emily Shinnevere because his position was, minors can't get medical care in Louisiana without their parents' consent. They just can't do it. And I'm sure that he was speaking at it from a good faith perspective because he can't imagine a kid being able to go get medical care without their parents. But the fact of the matter is it's the reality. It's the law in Louisiana right now. And there's no age cut off.

Danielle Walker (18:59.888)

That's, yeah, it's sick. It passed House Health and Welfare unanimously, that first committee, and then it passed the House 83 to 9 with 11 Democrats joining Republicans. So this is a highly bipartisan issue, Chris. Let me just list the Democrats who joined the Republican majority in favor of this bill in the House. There were Daryl Adams, Ken Brass, Chad Brown, Marcus Bryant, Robbie Carter, Timmy Chassault.

Amy Freeman, Alonzo Knox, Terry Landry, Rodney Lyons, and Pat Moore. But as you said, it died in Senate health and welfare. it could have been, Chris, could it have been resurrected because it was voluntarily deferred? Yeah.

Chris Alexander (19:42.496)

Yes. Yes, it could have. No question about that. it wasn't. In fact, McMath, when he encouraged her to voluntarily defer it, said, let's revisit this and come back next year. We'll come back next year and go forward on it. And I always want to do it next year. Yeah. What about the kids now? And it's just too important to wait on this. By the way, this is the second year in a row.

Danielle Walker (19:57.786)

They always want to do it next year. Let's just kick the can. What about the kids now? What about the...

Danielle Walker (20:10.694)

Yeah.

Chris Alexander (20:11.105)

because Dodie Horton brought it last year and pulled it back. And this year it's voluntarily deferred by Genevieve. It's just unbelievable. And I think Louisiana citizens have a right to know that two years in a row now, this bill, which would simply involve parents in critical decisions that their minors are making, which again, seems like an absolute no brainer twice now has been killed. And, you know, it's not, it's not acceptable.

particularly when it didn't need to be. The bill was not so structurally defective that it had to be deferred. These amendments could have been punched in there and they could have gone and voted on this in the Senate, and this could be at the governor's desk right now, and frankly, it should be.

Danielle Walker (20:56.144)

That's true and you know this legislature loves to punch through bills that are highly imperfect and say that they're going to clean them up later. So that was an available option as well.

Chris Alexander (21:04.799)

Of course. I've seen bills almost entirely rewritten, Danielle, in committee and go on and survive and end up getting passed. You know, this is a red herring and, you know, it's one of those things we have to definitely keep our eye And I applaud Rep. Genevieve for bringing this bill and for arguing. She did a very good job in committee, by the way, you know, going back and forth with lawyers on a committee.

basically being cross-examined and she answered the questions quite well.

Danielle Walker (21:38.032)

Great, great. Well, I hope she has the fortitude to bring it back next year and see it all the way through. I who knows what headwinds came against her. We hear from legislators that they get some pretty nasty emails and voicemails. So what we see is only the tip of the iceberg when it comes to the resistance that they face to do the right thing.

Chris Alexander (22:03.329)

Yeah, and Senator Fesi certainly knows something about the nasty voicemail.

Danielle Walker (22:06.98)

That's right. And his bill is up next, Chris, SB2. This was his bill that would have banned fluoride from water systems in the state of Louisiana. It passed Senate Health and Welfare 6-3 on a party line vote. It passed the Senate Floor 24-10 with two Republicans joining Democrats in opposition. And they were Patrick Connick and comrade Greg Miller, who loves to vote against the people.

And then it failed in the House Health and Welfare Committee, five to ten, with five Republicans joining the Democrats in opposition. were Stephanie Barrow, Rhonda Butler, Emily Chenivere, Wayne McMahon and Joe Stagney.

Chris Alexander (22:53.931)

Yeah, there were two. The main reason I think why this failed in committee, Danielle, over on the House side was that they had what appeared to be some credible testimony there, because I watched it, that the levels of fluoride currently in the water are not at toxic or dangerous levels and that they are all levels approved by whatever the national powers that be are, is it the FDA or whoever.

And so it's not dangerous to the kids. And it also provides dental care that they otherwise many of them would not be getting. Those were the two main arguments. So they really kind of threw themselves on the sympathy of the committee with regard to the, you know, the hygiene issue with kids. And they cited some statistics that basically said that they're not at, the Florida is not at dangerous levels. So there's no need to do this.

Danielle Walker (23:52.624)

Well, I don't trust the experts when it comes to what dangerous levels the government putting chemicals in any of our consumables. So, yeah, I feel that the skepticism that the committee members so often don't reserve and let their skepticism flow freely over everything, they could have reserved their skepticism for the so-called experts on this one.

Chris Alexander (24:21.385)

Absolutely. mean, just, Danielle, we could spend a whole show just spanning the last five years of how many times the government has recommended protocols or advised certain actions that have turned out to be not only absolutely wrong, but harmful. So when the government recommends something, it never ceases to shock me the number of people who still

Danielle Walker (24:25.411)

You

Chris Alexander (24:47.821)

blind reliance and faith and what the government tells them. I I'll never quite understand that but but we still have quite a few.

Danielle Walker (24:51.983)

Yeah.

Danielle Walker (24:56.836)

Yeah, what was the famous Reagan line? The five most terrifying words to any American should be, I'm the government and I'm here to help.

Chris Alexander (25:04.429)

Exactly. Well said.

Danielle Walker (25:09.398)

Look, all hope may not be lost on this. Senator Fesi seems to think that he has has something up his sleeve. So we shall see if he's able to prevail some other way. We'll keep you posted if that is the case. I pray that I pray that it is. Yeah.

Chris Alexander (25:22.253)

Yes. And let me say one last thing about this, about his bill, because I admire Senator Fesi for this. He tried to get this bill attached to a bill by Representative Turner over on the Senate side because he wasn't willing to give up on it. the Senate president and a couple of rules that the amendment was not germane to the underlying bill, and it probably wasn't. But

I still admire Senator Fesi for doing everything that he can do and even now doing everything that he can do to get this across the finish line and get it to the governor's desk. He's a real fighter.

Danielle Walker (26:00.1)

Yeah, he is. I appreciate that so much. And next up is some Maha agenda. Senate Bill 14 by Senator Patrick McMath and Senate Bill 117 by Blake Miguez. Both of these are pretty similar. They're complimentary. I believe Senator McMath's

goes a little bit more into detail about the different chemicals that must be left out. But these are it's some new instructions on what what can go into the school lunches, what is allowed perhaps in SNAP benefits. I think that's pending federal approval since it's a federal program and even what's allowed what must be marked, I believe clearly in

in the menus of restaurants and things that can be sold in the state of Louisiana. So you can get into it a little bit more Chris, but both of these bills made it through. The governor has not signed either one of them yet.

Chris Alexander (27:06.443)

Yeah, this is basically the get the garbage out of our kids food bill. You know, Danielle, our kids, many kids in Louisiana eat breakfast and lunch at school every day. And, you know, what they're consuming right now is just terrible for them. And so this bill, it's perfectly consistent with the MAHA agenda and Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is simply to get all that garbage out of their foods. And you're right about the SNAP benefits because of the

because the SNAP benefits, think that's a federal program, it's federal money. The state has to seek authority to alter that program, the SNAP benefits, and make sure that that is healthy as well. In other words, that you can't use the SNAP benefits for garbage. But I think it's a good bill. I actually testified on this one, and I'm very, happy that it got through and it's at the governor's desk. I'd be surprised if the governor does not sign

both Senator McMath's MAHA bill and Senator McGus's MAHA bill. I'd be quite surprised.

Danielle Walker (28:09.476)

Yep. Yep. I would be quite surprised too. Although you never know, maybe Senator Cassidy called him and told him not to do it.

Chris Alexander (28:19.755)

You know what? I have a feeling that Senator Cassidy has a straight line to the governor. I believe he does. Not sure that Senator Cassidy himself would even want to weigh in on this because I don't think it serves him very well politically. He's in enough trouble as it is.

Danielle Walker (28:26.65)

Yeah, seems like it.

Danielle Walker (28:40.602)

Yeah, he is. is. All right. Next up, another one by Senator Mike Fesi, Senate Bill 19. And this is his over-the-counter dispensing of Ivermectin. And amazingly, this passed, Chris. It shouldn't be amazing, but it is kind of amazing in this environment of, I don't know, health freedom skepticism, if you want to call it that. But it passed the Senate floor 28 to 8.

with Democrat Larry Selders joining the Republicans in support. Our old friend absent Bob Owen was absent. Owen was absent for this one. It passed the House 67 to 26 and votes were all over the place on this when there were six Democrats joining the Republicans in support and five Republicans joining the Democrats in opposition. I will just name

Chris Alexander (29:17.994)

Absinth Owen.

Danielle Walker (29:35.802)

the Republicans who joined the Democrats in opposition because they think they know better than you do. And they are Vincent Cox, Paula Davis, Barbara Freiburg, Jeremy Lacombe, and Polly Thomas. No big surprises there. Several Republicans were absent, and you can take that for what you will. You can see if you pick up on a pattern here. For some, you will. Some, I don't think there is a pattern.

The first is Mike Bam, then Beth Billings, Brett Gaiman, Michael Melloran, Philip Tarver, Mark Wright, and Z Zerang. It has been sent to the governor, Chris, but he has not yet signed it.

Chris Alexander (30:14.453)

Yeah. I'm not necessarily suspicious about the Republicans that were absent on this one because it passed very substantially. Their absence really didn't make any difference, but they could have been doing it because they just didn't want to go on record voting for this because of pushback they were getting from one or more special interests, you know, and they didn't want to be on the record voting for it. But I do think it's very important. Vincent Cox,

Danielle Walker (30:25.734)

Yeah.

Chris Alexander (30:43.981)

Paula Davis, Barbara Freiburg, Jeremy Lacombe, and Polly Thomas, all Republicans voting against allowing a widely lauded, harmless, and extremely effective drug that was used and is used for multiple purposes throughout the world and actually won a Nobel Prize several years ago, that they would vote against allowing that over the counter.

to a grocery store and get all kinds of things over the counter, drugs over the counter, but you can't get ivermectin over the counter. I would love to know what their explanation is for voting against this.

Danielle Walker (31:27.096)

Yeah, well, they all think we're nuts, right? All these COVID denying lunatics is what I would say for some of them.

Chris Alexander (31:33.865)

Yeah, but the ultimate evidence that they're the ones who are nuts is the fact that in light of everything that's come to light, they still think we're nuts. That's the ultimate evidence of their insanity.

Danielle Walker (31:42.727)

That's right.

Yeah, that's true. They're probably, it stands to reason that they may be brainwashed by MSNBC.

Chris Alexander (31:52.839)

Exactly. We're going to live stream our Ivermectin party whenever we have one and they can all watch it.

Danielle Walker (31:56.966)

I bet they'll watch you. All right. Well, next up, there's a couple bills that were related to abortion this session. The first one has come every year. It comes every year. House Bill 215 this year was brought by Representative Delisha Boyd and she was trying to make it so that in our state there would be an exception to abortion law allowing for

rape and incest to not to not count as abortion if you were raped or if you were a victim to incest. Fortunately, this bill died in house criminal justice. But Chris, do you want to remind the listeners maybe a little bit about how this bill would create a gaping hole in the in our abortion law?

Chris Alexander (32:46.029)

Sure. Well, first of all, the bill is not even honest. I would have more respect for the author of the bill if she just said, yes, it's abortion, but under these horrific, very difficult circumstances, it should be allowed. That's not what she's doing. She's basically saying in the bill that, you know, pregnancy under rape and incest, that's not an abortion when clearly it is an abortion. So really, it's very misleading from the very start.

But every time I look at a bill like this more broadly, Danielle, I always know that this is simply the first hole in the wall and it will continue to expand and expand and expand. For instance, if you say that abortion, you know, in cases of rape and incest is not abortion and it's acceptable, doctors at that point are free to say, based on the word of anybody who comes in there,

any mother who comes in there, pregnant mother, and says that she's been raped to do an abortion because there's no requirement that any element of proof be established. The claim cannot be investigated. She can't be second guessed. And there's no evidence that can be put forward to either prove or deny that it actually resulted from rape. Nothing. Everything's taken at face value. So I have a feeling if this is passed, if this ever were to be passed,

suddenly there would be 50 or 100 or 1,000 times, many more pregnancies resulting curiously enough from rape or incest. Because it's really all you have to say. And sometimes when these girls are very, very desperate to have an abortion because they're scared to death, they'll say or do anything to get it done. And if this bill passed, that's all that would be required.

Danielle Walker (34:36.902)

Yeah. Yeah.

Chris Alexander (34:37.985)

So it really would, it would open up a big Pandora's box that we don't need in the state and ultimately probably get us right back within five or 10 years to abortion on demand again in Louisiana, which is what we don't want. So we do not want to allow any concessions when it comes to our commitment to protect the unborn. We can't do it.

Danielle Walker (34:59.014)

That's right. And Chris, with House Bill 575, Representative Lauren Ventrillo was taking this in a different direction. She was taking it in a protective direction. And I'm going to need you to talk about it a little bit. But I think the main goal of her bill was to create a more chilling effect for abortion in the state. So to dissuade it even

even greater by threat of lawsuit.

Chris Alexander (35:32.086)

Right, exactly. this would, her bill would bring a, would allow a cause of action, allow a mother to sue anytime, you know, an abortion is performed on her for her emotional distress. Certainly anytime she receives abortion inducing medication, generally they get it online and they ship it to them and they use it. So those doctors would

would be able to be prosecuted. But interestingly, this bill, Danielle, excludes doctors who practice in the state of Louisiana from any kind of civil liability. And I asked Lauren Ventrella about that. She said, well, doctors in Louisiana are already criminally liable for performing abortions. But that doesn't really answer my question because this bill has to do with civil liability. so by its terms, the only providers that would be

Danielle Walker (36:11.535)

interesting.

Chris Alexander (36:29.843)

civilly liable or could be sued for this would be the doctors or the vendors even who send or provide these abortion inducing drugs to these women and then they secure an abortion. But it would not provide to, it would not be allowed against a doctor in Louisiana who performs an abortion. And she says it's because they can already be criminally prosecuted for that. But

I don't understand why you would exclude doctors in Louisiana who do an abortion in the traditional manner from civil liability. That doesn't make any sense.

Danielle Walker (37:08.036)

You know what it might be, Chris? Remember earlier, gosh, is probably maybe last year, AG Liz Murrell went after some of those doctors who were up in the Northeast that were prescribing the abortifacient drugs to women in Louisiana, and she was going after them for having done so in violation of Louisiana state law.

I wonder if she's run into some headwinds there legally and this provides some kind of stopgap measure to further make sure that the doctors, I guess to put a chilling effect on those doctors' willingness to prescribe those kinds of drugs and have them shipped across state lines.

Chris Alexander (37:57.484)

Yeah. So this, you're exactly right, Danielle. think this bill focuses specifically and exclusively on any person who doesn't live here, who facilitates an abortion that occurs here through the dispensing of these abortifacient drugs. I think that's what it's about. But under the bill, no doctor in Louisiana who's licensed to practice here could be sued for either

sued civilly for either performing an abortion or for providing drugs to induce an abortion. It's off limits. And maybe that was one of the concessions that they had to have in order to get the bill passed. I'm not sure, but if I had been on the other side, I think I would have been very enthusiastic about making sure that any doctor, no matter where they live or anybody, whether they're out of state or here,

Danielle Walker (38:41.712)

perhaps.

Chris Alexander (38:54.529)

who performs an abortion or who provides abortion-inducing drugs would be able to be sued for it, but this bill doesn't provide that.

Danielle Walker (39:03.3)

Yeah, okay. But there are criminal protections in Louisiana and at least there are civil protections for doctors practicing, well, it's not civil protections for the doctors, but it covers women slash patients from doctors who are outside of the state. Yeah, okay.

Chris Alexander (39:21.055)

Out of state, out of state and not just doctors, any person or entity that facilitates that process.

Danielle Walker (39:29.252)

And you know what, I think we had mentioned this offline as well, Chris, but it kind of also addresses maybe a hole in Senator Presley's bill from last year that was the coercive abortion one, where if those products are not meant to be available in the state of Louisiana and someone is doing that, there should be some kind of liability on the provider part, as well as the person who's trying to coerce an abortion.

Chris Alexander (39:59.156)

I agree. Yeah. You know what? That's a great point. And it does fill out that bill. The issue that keeps coming up in my mind about this bill, the philosophical issue though is we're not talking here about a woman who is induced under false pretext into having an abortion. We're not talking about a coerced abortion. We're not talking about a woman who's fooled into having an abortion, perhaps thinks she's using medication for something else.

And it causes an abortion. Now we're talking about a woman who knowingly and deliberately procures an abortion, knowing what she's doing. And then thereafter, this bill creates a cause, a civil cause of action against the person who provided either the abortion or the means by which she secured it through the medication. So I don't know that philosophically or morally I'm really comfortable with that.

I certainly don't believe that a woman should be criminally prosecuted for having an abortion, as a doctor should be. But I also don't know that I support allowing a woman to sue and get money on the back of an unborn child that was terminated. I just don't know if I agree with that because it just doesn't sit right with me.

Danielle Walker (41:24.74)

Yeah, the only thing I can say about that is if it strengthens the protections or further dissuades out-of-state doctors from doing, prescribing or dispensing, then that's a win for me. I think that helps. But on the whole, I agree with you.

Chris Alexander (41:47.576)

But I do think you're, and I agree with you, Danielle, on the deterrent part. Ideally, ideally, no woman will ever have to sue over this because this deterrent effect is so strong in the bill that it just never happens. That's certainly what I would ideally like to see.

Danielle Walker (42:05.316)

Yeah, me too. All right, let's move on to the topic of personal liberties. This is a nice one that we haven't talked about at all this session because we didn't seem to think there was going to be too much opposition to it. I think we were right in that. It's House Bill 56 by Representative Dodie Horton. And she brought this bill to codify that we all people in the state of Louisiana have the right to display

the United States flag. I don't know if you have more detail on that, Chris, or what maybe was the reason she ended up bringing that.

Chris Alexander (42:43.777)

I think she brought it, the bill basically says that if you live in an apartment complex or a condominium and there's a condominium agreement there, homeowners agreement there, or the apartment complex has certain rules in place, they can't prohibit any tenant from waving the American flag. And I think it's a good thing.

Danielle Walker (42:50.33)

Okay.

Danielle Walker (42:58.243)

Yeah.

Danielle Walker (43:11.515)

Yeah.

Chris Alexander (43:11.531)

I don't know that there are many tenants who are getting in trouble for waving the American flag. I don't know that, but I'm all for the American flag and anything that makes it easier to be able to do that. I am all for it. So very happy about that. You know, this jog me though, Danielle, not, not exactly the same issue, but somewhat similar. You know, HP 71 from last year that required the

display of the 10 commandments in every public school classroom in Louisiana. That was Dodie Horton's bill and it passed and was signed. a few days ago, the U.S. Fifth Circuit ruled that that was unconstitutional and that that bill is illegal. I don't agree with that at all. And I don't even agree with their rationale behind it. As for reasons that you and I have discussed before.

The very first Bible that was officially commissioned in the United States of America was commissioned by the United States Congress and recommended for use by every inhabitant, every citizen in America. So, you know, I'm not sure that the Constitution or the history of our founding fathers really recommends this impenetrable wall between church and state.

that the current jurisprudence seems to articulate. I just don't believe that. But long and the short of it is I thought it'd be interesting for our listeners to know that the Fifth Circuit just declared that bill unconstitutional.

Danielle Walker (44:45.146)

Yeah, well, I imagine it's gonna go all the way to the Supreme Court and I believe the Ten Commandments are displayed very prominently inside of the Supreme Court. hopefully that will give them pause and cause for reflection as they weigh in on this.

Chris Alexander (45:03.085)

So under this rationale, Danielle, if there was a Jew on the United States Supreme Court that wanted to bring an action alleging that that display in the Supreme Court chamber is unconstitutional under this rationale, they would win.

Danielle Walker (45:19.056)

Yeah.

Yeah, they would win. All right, but I don't believe we're going to get stuck there. I really don't think so. I'm ready for some of those corrupt judges to be shown the door.

Chris Alexander (45:27.392)

Mm-mm.

Chris Alexander (45:33.951)

It cannot come soon enough.

Danielle Walker (45:35.93)

Yeah. Amazingly, there were some Democrats who were opposed to this bill, Chris. I can't wrap my head around why. But it passed the House 85 to 6 with six Democrats opposing it. I think it's worth mentioning their names because it's the American flag for crying out loud. They were Wilford Carter, Kyle Green, Ed Larvadane, Denise Marcel, Candice Newell, and Tammy Phelps. It did pass the Senate unanimously.

signed by Governor Landry on June 10th and becomes effective August 1st.

Chris Alexander (46:09.291)

Yeah. And I'm perplexed that anybody would vote against it as are you, Danielle, because we're just talking about allowing tenants, people who live in condos and apartments to be able to wave, to fly the American flag outside their own door. It's like, why would you be opposed to this? You're not forcing anything on anybody else. They're basically saying that by voting against this, that nobody should even have to look at the American flag.

Danielle Walker (46:37.166)

You know what else, Chris? There's a, think I saw this in the news not too long ago and I don't know if it was in Louisiana. It was, I don't know where it was, but you know how Camper World has the biggest flags ever. If you're driving down the interstate, you pass a Camper World. They have the most massive American flags you can imagine. I heard that someone brought a suit against Camper World for noise violation because the flag whips so furiously and so loudly.

Chris Alexander (47:03.841)

Danielle Walker (47:07.058)

So maybe this is a protection for camper world as well.

Chris Alexander (47:11.501)

Well, maybe so maybe so they should they they really if they don't look as far as I'm concerned if they had had an anti whipping provision in here I probably would have supported it or you know

Danielle Walker (47:23.866)

don't know that anyone lives close enough to a camper world to hear that kind of, have a reasonable argument to make, but anyway, it's pretty funny. All right.

Chris Alexander (47:32.462)

Yeah. The Constitution does not protect your right not to be inconvenienced.

Danielle Walker (47:38.901)

That's true. That's true. All right. Next up House Bill 221 by Representative Larry Bagley. We have not talked about this one this session, but it is a not so secret favorite of mine and it would have provided should it have passed. This is by Representative Larry Bagley, by the way, for us to not have to have inspection.

stickers with the OMV and I'll tell you why that's important to me Chris because either you own your car or you don't Why does the state get to come in and tell me whether I get to operate my vehicle or not? That's not right You already pay I mean you already pay property tax on this stupid car. You already paid the car You probably paid interest on the car

and now they want you every year to go and give the state a few nickels so that they can tell you you can continue to drive your own car. The state needs to shut up and sit down. I disagree with this so much. I disagree with inspection stickers.

Chris Alexander (48:42.06)

Yeah.

I disagree with them also, Danielle. And you can't even really make the argument that it's necessary because they're checking the mechanical functions of your car. They're checking the engine. They're checking the brakes. They're not checking. They don't go drive your car to see how it runs. They check your blinker and your brake light, you know, and that sort of thing. And then you're off on your way. So it's really not doing anything to, I guess, minimally to increase safety on the road.

Danielle Walker (49:08.782)

No, but you could, exactly, and you can get pulled over for not having an operational blinker, just, I mean, there's already recourse for that.

Chris Alexander (49:19.113)

Yeah, the big reason, Danielle, you just hit it. The reason why they don't want to do away with this is because people, you know, the state makes money off of it and private vendors who do this work, these inspection stickers make money off of it. And so they don't want to do away with it there. I have to tell you though, that I'm less offended by this than I am about the cell phone bill. I find, you know, but I am offended by this.

Danielle Walker (49:32.901)

Yeah.

Chris Alexander (49:50.08)

You'll continue to have to pay money to get your inspection sticker renewed. Just make sure that you're not talking on your handheld cell phone when you're on your way to get your inspection sticker renewed or else you're in trouble.

Danielle Walker (50:01.242)

Yeah. Yeah, that's true. Next up, Chris. Well, and I'll just say it was killed in house transportation. think, I think last year it may have made it through house transportation and got killed in appropriations, but I might be, I might be misremembering that. Yeah. All right. The next one under the banner of personal liberties is house bill three 71 by representative Barrow Amadei. And this was her bill that would just

Chris Alexander (50:17.013)

I think that's right.

Danielle Walker (50:31.174)

basically codify that if you are a religious institution, if you're a church, you have to be treated the same way as non-religious institutions by the state.

Chris Alexander (50:42.071)

by the state and specifically by the licensing authorities where you are. In other words, they cannot impose more onerous code requirements on buildings occupied by religious or quasi-religious organizations than they do on secular groups and secular businesses. It has to be the same. And this was really born out of a particular situation up in North Louisiana where a church was going to allow its building

to be used for a little religious daycare. And the fire marshal came in and imposed all kinds of requirements to make their building more safe before they could use it for that purpose. When they've got buildings all over the place that were made at the same time, that have the same alleged deficiencies as this building had, and they were giving them no problems.

So that's why this bill was brought. And I think it's very important, you know, because why should a religious organization be treated any differently than a secular organization when it comes, because this is a lot of money, Danielle. If you impose all these requirements to upgrade these buildings, that's a massive amount of money that would put a lot of churches out of business. That would put a lot of these small church schools out of business because they couldn't do it.

Danielle Walker (51:53.882)

Yeah.

Chris Alexander (52:06.533)

And so that's why the bill is important. I think it is, you said that it's not been signed yet, right?

Danielle Walker (52:14.726)

It has not. It passed the House 79 to 9 with nine Democrats opposing it. And similarly in the Senate, 33 to 5 with five Democrats opposing it. It was sent to the governor and Representative Omade said that he indicated an interest in a signing ceremony. So we may be seeing that soon. Yeah. All right. Next up.

Chris Alexander (52:34.487)

Good.

Danielle Walker (52:38.982)

Some a bill or two bills really by representative Raymond Cruz. The first was House Bill 386, which I believe got substituted with House Bill 695. This was his bill to establish gold and silver as currency. Chris, you know that the House Commerce Committee is one of the most difficult and somewhat ridiculous clownish

committees in the legislature. They gave Representative Cruz a heck of a time for this bill and they were doing it with some of the most ignorant arguments you could imagine.

Chris Alexander (53:22.423)

Yeah, it was extraordinary. The bill in original form would have not only recognized gold and silver as transactional currency in Louisiana, which means that you can use it with your just like a debit card, just like you could use fiat money, but it also would have set up a state depository and also would have allowed the treasurer to set up the parameters and to back it.

to secure it with state funds. And they completely destroyed this bill in committee, the first go round, to the point where Representative Cruz voluntarily deferred the bill, and then he brought it back later, and good for him, but it was in a much more truncated form. And the second version of the bill, or the substitute bill, simply allows, it simply supplements

Senator Abraham's bill from last year, which said that legal gold and silver can be recognized as legal tender in Louisiana. Representative Crews's bill adds to that the fact that gold-back debit cards can be, and silver-back debit cards can be used at the point of transaction if they can be converted into fiat money, which they can. So it just will allow debit cards

backed by gold and silver to be used just the same way you use debit cards backed by fiat money. But what the bill doesn't do now, it will not set up a state depository and it will not allow any involvement by the state treasurer, by John Fleming to set up parameters and to back the currency with the state engine basically is what happened. But it's legal.

or will be if he signs this bill, will absolutely be 100 % legal in Louisiana to use a gold-backed debit card the same way you use your fiat money-backed debit card.

Danielle Walker (55:29.104)

I'm going to look up and see if Governor Landry signed this yet, because I don't have that in my notes. But Chris, would you talk about the Republicans who raised holy hell about this bill in committee?

Chris Alexander (55:46.262)

Yeah. So the first time it went in, it went in in early May, House Commerce, in original form, and they raised all these objections. we're going to end up with a state bank. And, what about gold and silver? It fluctuates in value. And I'm sitting there thinking to myself, so does fiat money and gold and silver fluctuates in value far less. It holds its value so much better. Why are you raising all these objections? We don't live in a big brother government.

Danielle Walker (56:06.288)

Thank you.

Chris Alexander (56:15.543)

People who are going to invest their money, they have a right to invest in here if they want to. Let them do what they want to do. But nonetheless, he voluntarily deferred it the first time it went in there because of all the pushback from these people on the Commerce Committee who really don't know anything about commerce and these stupid questions, as you said. So he brings it back in the truncated form that I just said, and still many of these same Republicans voted against it, even though it

does nothing controversial at this point. Only controversial, I guess, to people on the Commerce Committee who don't want people to be able to transact in gold and silver in Louisiana. Carver. These are the no's on the second time it went in. Carver, ABER, Domain, Reiser, Saint-Blanc, and Polly Thomas. All of those Republicans voted against this bill simply

that would codify our right as Louisiana citizens to use a gold or silverback debit card for our personal transactions the same way we can use fiat money. So they don't want us to use something that is backed by a much more stable form of currency, but we can continue to invest and to use a destabilized form of currency, fiat money.

Danielle Walker (57:26.171)

Yeah.

Chris Alexander (57:43.041)

which is becoming increasingly devalued. Make it make sense. I can't make it make sense.

Danielle Walker (57:48.634)

Well, I'll tell you a couple things because I have some thoughts on this. The first thought is that this their no vote to me reveals that they were still under pressure by the banks and the banks were disingenuous about their reason for not wanting gold and silver as legal tender. Their reason is has nothing to do with state banks, which already exist, by the way.

Their reasoning has nothing to do with, oh, they're so concerned about the citizens being fleeced or duped or anything like that. They are concerned about what every single dollar that does not get put into their bank means $10 that their bank can't lend. And infractional banking is at the core here. So that's my one point.

Chris Alexander (58:42.603)

I think you're right. Because right now, Daniel, if I'm understanding you correctly, if I deposit $100 in my bank account, the bank can lend out 90 of that.

Danielle Walker (58:56.246)

No, the bank can lend out a thousand of that.

Chris Alexander (59:00.469)

of a hund- of a hundred?

Danielle Walker (59:01.986)

Yes, for every dollar they can lend out 10. That's fractional. A thousand. Yeah. Yeah.

Chris Alexander (59:05.623)

So if I put $100 in my bank, they can lend out $1,000. Yeah. So they're obviously concerned about having less money going into their banks because it's less money they can lend. That's what it really comes down to, isn't it?

Danielle Walker (59:17.86)

Yeah, I mean.

Yeah, that's what it comes down to. And I also would just like to make a point. So you think about, there's these people on the House Commerce Committee, they're so concerned, they want to protect us from ourselves, right? The same garbage lines we heard during COVID. They're going to protect us poor, ignorant constituents from our own devices, from our own free will, because we may be making some stupid choices. Well, guess what?

Those are some of the same people who voted against and who railed against Senator Valerie Hodges bill. Okay, so it's not the same people because it's House versus Senate, but it's the same mindset. Okay, the same people who railed against or the same con kind of mindset that railed against Senator Valerie Hodges bill that would protect us from foreign adversaries having immovable property near military installations that would protect our

vote from any input or any nexus with a foreign adversary. So let's see where they want to protect us. They want to protect us from our own money. They want to protect us from our own health care decisions, but they don't want to protect us from actual evil people who are trying to kill us or to change the outcome of our elections. That's where the priorities of this legislature are.

Chris Alexander (01:00:43.565)

Absolutely, absolutely. The selective paternal instinct that they have. it's always consistent. Their paternalism is always consistent with what is in their best political interests. their libertarianism, where the government shouldn't have any involvement in any of this stuff, is also always consistent with what their bottom line is. Namely,

What are their donors telling them to do?

Danielle Walker (01:01:14.906)

Yeah, I'm disgusted by it. I find it extremely transparent and offensive.

Chris Alexander (01:01:22.508)

That's very well said, Danielle.

Danielle Walker (01:01:25.954)

All right. Well, let's move on to another piece of legislation that is highly offensive to me, and that is House Bill 519 by Representative Brian Glorioso, the infamous cockroach bill that finally made it through this year because of the strong backing of the governor. No doubt this allows you to be pulled over and ticketed for talking on your cell phone while you're driving.

Chris Alexander (01:01:53.164)

Yeah, and we've talked about this so much. I am just as opposed to this as I have been every single time we've discussed it. The bill, although this is what it's sold as, it's not going to reduce insurance rates. It's not going to make our highways or our roadways any safer. It's just not going to happen. What it's going to do is cause more of our money to be transferred to the government in the form of these citations for talking on a handheld cell phone.

And it's going to create opportunities for law enforcement officers to further infringe into people's freedom and people's privacy. think it's the absolute epitome of big brother government. And to add insult to injury, no one has been able to show me any kind of a statistical study that shows a correlation between talking on a handheld cell phone and increased traffic wrecks. Yet they still pass this. It still goes through. And I still believe

It's all about getting more money to the state. That's what this is about.

Danielle Walker (01:02:55.128)

It is well and of course it's the virtue signaling of them taking care of us yet again right.

Chris Alexander (01:03:00.737)

Yes, yes, that we're taking care of you. But really it's revenue harvesting under the false pretext of we're taking care of you and this is important for your safety. nobody's really fooled by this. And Danielle, I can tell you that probably seven out of 10 citizens in Louisiana don't like this.

Danielle Walker (01:03:22.906)

Yeah, it did pass the House 71 to 28, Chris. There were, it was mostly opposed by Republicans, but there were a few Democrats who joined as well. I'm just going to go ahead and list all of the no votes because I think that's important here. Representative Beryl Omidy, Larry Bagley, Mike Baehm, Rhonda Butler, Josh Carlton, DeWitt Carrier, Ray Cruz, Daryl Desatel, Kathy Edmonston, Julie Emerson.

Les Farnham, Gabe Firmat, Brian Fontenot, Brett Guymon, Jacob Landry, Ed Larvadane, Danny McCormick, Michael Melloran, Nicholas Muscarello, Joe Angeron, Chuck Owen, Tammy Phelps, Rodney Schammerhorn, Laurie Schlegel, Joe Stagney, Lauren Ventrella, Debbie Villio, and Joy Walters. It also passed the Senate 33 to 5, and I'll just give you the...

the five who voted against it, which is they were on the right side of history, Franklin Foyle, Valerie Hodges, Sam Jenkins, Blake Miguez, and Alan Seabow.

Chris Alexander (01:04:30.219)

Yeah, all of those Republicans in the House and the Senate did the right thing, probably for the very same reasons that we've been discussing. Just wasn't enough of them. But I'm so glad that we we stated their names for our listeners to know how they voted and they deserve real credit for doing that. Because you know what, Danielle, if for no other reason, they opposed the governor.

They opposed the governor on a bill that he not only wanted, but was part of his insurance package and they went against him. So I applaud that.

Danielle Walker (01:05:02.084)

Yeah. Yeah, it is worth applause. All right. Next up, DOTD. There was some major bills that were intended to transform DOTD and the contracting process. Chris, on a side note, the Bourg Bridge is supposed to open this week. So I'll report back. We will see if the Bourg Bridge opens this week while I'm still in town. I will have a party and I'm going to eat a banana split.

Chris Alexander (01:05:32.175)

I would do the exact same thing as I ready for the apocalypse.

Danielle Walker (01:05:33.904)

You

Danielle Walker (01:05:38.258)

Look, House Bill 528 by Representative Ryan Boriak. This bill basically outlines and authorizes the transformation of the DOTD. It would reform the org structure and kind of reaffirm and change around duties, powers, responsibilities of its officers and employees.

It made it through everything unanimously because everyone can agree that DOTD as a, up until now has done a pretty garbage job of taking care of the roads and the bridges. You know, in, in Terrebonne right now, we're under a state of emergency because there are so many bridges that are out.

Chris Alexander (01:06:22.337)

Yeah, this is if there is a non-controversial bill of the entire legislative session, this is probably it. This must be it. My understanding is that Joe Donahue, as of a week or two ago, is out at DOTD. Yeah, he's not the head of DOT anymore. I think he's executive counsel now for DOTD, but somebody else is in there now.

Danielle Walker (01:06:37.721)

Really?

Chris Alexander (01:06:46.965)

I don't know exactly why that occurred. I thought Joe was doing the best job he could possibly do. Maybe it was a mutual thing, but they have somebody new in there now. Whatever the case, certainly this restructuring needed to be done, needs to be done in order to streamline that agency. mean, that is a labyrinthine structure of inefficiency, bureaucratic inefficiency. There's no question about that.

Danielle Walker (01:06:53.22)

Yeah.

Danielle Walker (01:07:14.382)

Yeah, and unaccountability. think that's

Chris Alexander (01:07:16.18)

and unaccountability. Absolutely.

Danielle Walker (01:07:19.027)

And Chris, it's been sent to the governor. He has not signed it yet.

Chris Alexander (01:07:25.645)

I think that maybe Danielle, he's wanting to sort of compartmentalize these bills and sign them all if they pertain to different issues on the same day. That's the only thing I can think of of why he wouldn't be signing these bills.

Danielle Walker (01:07:35.204)

Yeah, I would think so. Yeah. Yeah, I agree with that. Let me see. I don't know when it would become when it would become effective. Let me just look real quick because I kind of wonder some of these he may just not want to sign. He may he may not want to signing ceremony for although you would think this one would be a feather in his cap. So I would imagine he will have some kind of signing ceremony for this.

Chris Alexander (01:08:01.698)

Yeah.

Chris Alexander (01:08:06.155)

I'm certain that he'll have a signing ceremony for any bill that will serve him politically and give him good press. That's one thing I think we can count on.

Danielle Walker (01:08:14.702)

Yeah, I think that's fair. think that's very fair. All right, another bill related to DOTD. We've talked a lot about this one as well. Senate Bill 216 by Senator Valerie Hodges, and this kind of transforms the bidding process for DOTD projects to discourage delays and incentivize early completion of road projects. Another one that went through unanimously. People know that this has to happen.

Chris Alexander (01:08:41.261)

and very good bill that we desperately need.

Danielle Walker (01:08:45.03)

Yeah, we do need it. And I guess Chris just switching gears a little bit here on insurance rates slash tort reform. We followed at the beginning of session House Bill 34 by Representative Brian Glorioso. It kind of stalled out at a certain point and Senate Bill 231 by Senator Mike Reese is the bill that got picked up for collateral source.

And this was the only bill, Chris, that you said at the beginning of the session. Now, your tune may have changed on this because I think there were a few others that may have done something positive as well. But this bill would have a measurable impact on the future of auto insurance rates if it's handled properly.

Chris Alexander (01:09:35.97)

Yeah, there were a couple of other bills that I think could have a marginal effect on reducing insurance rates. This is the only bill that I agreed with that I believe could have a positive effect on it. And the way Sutter Reese explained it very well in committee is basically that it's collateral source. If you go to trial and your original billed amount of your medical costs was $100,000.

but your health insurance company paid $60,000 of that and you don't owe that anymore. Well, the jury has a right to know that the jury has a right to know what the original billed amount was a hundred thousand. And they have a right to know what the amount that you still owe, which in this case is only $40,000. And then the jury gets to make the decision about whether to award the whole original billed amount or just the amount that's still owed. So

That's important. I think the jury should have that knowledge and have that flexibility. And if you take jury cases across the state, Danielle, where you have medical bills that are often much larger than that, and a significant percentage of those bills have been paid by a third party healthcare provider, and a jury adjusts the award downward based upon their knowledge of that, I think that that is going to save insurance companies a lot of money across the state of Louisiana.

The question then becomes, do they go invest that money? Because know, insurance companies are allowed to invest in mutual funds and do all that stuff. They're allowed to do that. Or are they going to reduce their policyholders premiums as a result of that? Because it looks like it would put them in a position to do that, because this should translate into significant savings for insurance companies if juries do what most juries will do in this situation, which is what most people will do.

Danielle Walker (01:11:10.48)

Yeah.

Chris Alexander (01:11:30.657)

Yeah, let's award the amount that the plaintiff still owes. We're not going to give the plaintiff a windfall if they've already paid that money and it didn't come out of the plaintiff's pocket. So we're going to reduce the medical cost award on this. So it should translate into a reduction in premiums. How much? I don't know, but I think it could have a significant effect depending upon how the insurance companies handle these savings, what they do with these savings.

Danielle Walker (01:11:37.007)

Yeah.

Danielle Walker (01:11:56.27)

Yeah, a couple points on this one, Chris. You mentioned to me early on in session that this is the exact bill essentially that Governor Landry vetoed last year. Now, when this bill came up, there was some conversation about it and Governor Landry was on record saying, maybe is it a press conference? I can't remember exactly where he said it, but he said, if you all send me what they do in Texas, that I'm going to sign it.

Well, then you dug into it and found out that what they do in Texas is basically nothing. They do what we already have, which is a negative thing, right? Yeah.

Chris Alexander (01:12:33.077)

Right. And so, but this is Danielle, almost identical to what he vetoed last year. And so we'll see. I don't even, I don't know how long this bill has been at his desk.

Danielle Walker (01:12:46.97)

Let me see if I can tell you, hold on one second. Let's see here.

Danielle Walker (01:12:56.614)

Sorry, I'm a few clicks away. Let's see. All right. It's been sent to the governor. It was sent on the 11th, so he has 20 days. So he's still got a little time.

Chris Alexander (01:12:57.922)

No, that's okay.

Chris Alexander (01:13:08.449)

Yeah, he's still got a little time to do it. look, he should either just not do anything and let it take effect or sign the bill. Because I do think on balance, it's a good bill. It's a transparency bill. Senator Seabal explained on the Senate floor, he basically said, right now under Louisiana law, the plaintiff's lawyer is allowed to lie to the jury and the defense lawyer, the lawyer representing the insurance company, is not allowed to tell the truth. And that's it.

And they're not saying that the jury can only know the amount that was paid. They're saying let the jury know the amount billed and the amount paid and let them make the decision. I can't think of anything that's any more fair than that.

Danielle Walker (01:13:52.452)

Yeah, it passed 27 to 8 in the Senate on a party line vote and then in the House it passed 80 to 14 with 10 Democrats joining the Republicans in support. They were Daryl Adams, Delisha Boyd, Ken Brass, Chad Brown, Adrian Fisher, Steve Jackson, Travis Johnson, Alonzo Knox, Terry Landry and Rashid Young. Interestingly, perhaps Stephanie Hilferty and Troy Abert were absent for this vote, although it didn't out.

didn't impact the outcome. And then Chris, you mentioned Senator Sebaugh, he brought SB 111 and we talked about this already. But this was a bill regarding fair claims processing and you can get into what that actually means. But the governor vetoed it.

Chris Alexander (01:14:23.735)

Yeah.

Chris Alexander (01:14:42.637)

Yeah, the bill would prohibit a claimant, a claimant's lawyer, from being able to hold or argue that an insurance company is in bad faith simply for not paying a claim within a 30-day period, which is the statutory requirement, under certain circumstances. A, there's a legitimate good faith dispute about

who caused the wreck. There's a little good faith dispute about whether or not the medical damages that are being claimed were caused by the accident. We've got some legitimate discovery that we've got to do to find out some more information and we haven't had the time to do it. And issues like that, you know, would say in those circumstances, under Louisiana law, you can't hold an insurance company in bad faith and make them pay all these bad faith monetary penalties. You just can't do it. So it was a fair bill.

And Governor Landry vetoed the bill after saying that he would sign any insurance reform legislation that comes to his desk. He vetoed this. And I don't quite understand it because I do think that there needs to be some very clear provisions in law delineating when an insurance company can be held in bad faith and when they can't. And this seems very common sense to me.

Danielle Walker (01:16:06.49)

Yeah. Well, it passed the Senate 26 to 13 with comrade Greg Miller and Patrick joining, Patrick Connick joining the Democrats in opposition. And it passed the House 58 to 42 with 14 Republicans opposing. And Chris, this is a mixed bag of Republicans, people who I would normally not be surprised to see opposing something that we support. And a handful of people who

are surprising. So maybe there's something a little more controversial in there than meets the eye, but the 14 Republicans who voted against this bill were Chad Boyer, Vincent Cox, Stephanie Hilferty, Tim Kerner, Jeremy Lacombe, Shane Mack, Danny McCormick, Wayne McMahon, Nicholas Muscarello, Joe Stagney, Francis Thompson, Lauren Ventrella, and Jeff Wiley.

Chris Alexander (01:16:56.481)

The only two in there really that are even marginally surprising are Danny McCormick and Shane Mack. I don't, Lauren Ventriller probably, although Lauren in her practice, she doesn't do any insurance defense work. She does some of the personal injury plaintiffs work, I believe. So, but the really two that surprise me are McCormick and Mack. But again, in reading the bill, it looks like a fair bill.

Danielle Walker (01:17:04.248)

And Lauren Vittrella, I would say.

Chris Alexander (01:17:25.432)

that the governor vetoed.

Danielle Walker (01:17:26.458)

Yeah. Okay. Okay. The next bill in under the insurance banner is House Bill 148 by Representative Jeff Wiley. And this one basically turns the commissioner of insurance into an unaccountable czar. And I know I know you're strongly opposed to this one, Chris, and it's already been signed by the governor.

Chris Alexander (01:17:52.236)

Yeah, signed very, very quickly. know, under this bill, the insurance commissioner will be able to do whatever he wants to do whenever he wants to do it without being tied to any objective actuarial or market criteria for being able to do it. He can reject a request by an insurance company to raise rates. He can go back and order an insurance company retroactively to

Danielle Walker (01:17:54.245)

Yeah.

Chris Alexander (01:18:21.579)

refund money to insureds and policyholders going back years if he doesn't believe if he believes they've been charging them excessive rates He can also go back and order policyholders to pay additional premiums retroactively if he believes they haven't been Paying enough in insurance premiums and there is no accountability There is no actuarial data to which he would be tied in making these decisions or held to

So I am extremely alarmed about this bill. It's a horrible bill. And really it's a recipe for the arbitrary, abusive exercise of political power in the office of the commissioner of insurance. And never let anybody tell you that our august elected officials in Louisiana are above political reprisal and political retaliation, or even doing things that simply make themselves look good.

You know, so they're three weeks before an election that they want to win. So they order an insurance companies to reduce their rates and say, look, it's time we've got to fight for the policyholders are paying too much in insurance premiums, but he's only doing it for political reasons. I think this is an awful, awful bill.

Danielle Walker (01:19:39.054)

Yeah, and your theory, Chris, was that this was brought potentially by Governor Landry to undercut to be able to kneecap Commissioner Temple. Should he not be successful, he can lay all of the blame of the insurance failures at Tim Temple's feet.

Chris Alexander (01:20:01.556)

No question about it. That's exactly what the governor is trying to do. He wants to give him all this power. And then when Tim Temple chooses not to exercise it in an arbitrary way and allow the market to do what the market's supposed to do, Governor Landry will then blame Commissioner Temple when Governor Landry's own insurance package and all the things he's promised do not reach fruition. Yes, this is a blame game and he's setting Tim Temple up to take that blame. There's no question about it.

Danielle Walker (01:20:30.438)

Yeah, well, I'm looking forward to having Commissioner Temple back on the show. We're going to have him back on in a couple of weeks. And Chris, I know we talked about this bill last week, but probably also bears mentioning in this context that Senate bill 214 by Royce Du Plessis that would have made the insurance commissioner an appointed position appointed by the governor instead of an elected official. And I think

those two bills, this bill with that bill combined would have been just even bigger disaster.

Chris Alexander (01:21:04.703)

there's no question about it. The only silver lining in this bill is the fact that the insurance commissioner is still elected by the people. so we still, least theoretically, I know how you feel about the elections, at least theoretically, we still have the ultimate authority over this. If 214 had passed and the insurance commissioner had become an appointed position,

coupled with this bill that gives him the kind of power that he has, the amount of power that would be concentrated in the hands of the governor and, derivatively, the commissioner of insurance would have been nothing less than if we lived in a monarchical system where those two men ruled through a divine right of kings with no accountability whatsoever. That's basically what we would have had. So thank God we still have an elected insurance commissioner. I would love to know

And I'm sure that Governor Landry, of course, would say I had absolutely nothing to do with it. I'm wondering if he had anything to do with the push to make the insurance commissioner appointed.

Danielle Walker (01:22:10.852)

Yeah, I would venture to say he did.

Chris Alexander (01:22:13.037)

I would venture to say that he did too, but at any rate, Danielle, and I said this the other night at We the People, any positive influence or positive effect that these other insurance bills that were worked so hard on to get through, any positive effect that they may have had on reducing insurance rates in Louisiana are negated, completely obliterated by this bill, making the insurance commissioner an unaccountable czar.

I just don't see how it's going to work in that environment.

Danielle Walker (01:22:46.786)

No, I don't see how it's going to work either, hopefully, look, we have faith in Commissioner Temple and believe that he is operating in the best interest of the people of Louisiana during his tenure. So hopefully he can convince insurance companies of the same, although that puts a heck of a lot bigger hill for him to climb and getting them to come here than it would have otherwise.

Chris Alexander (01:23:14.131)

No question about it. And, you know, I had a chance to talk to him down at the session, Daniel, about this bill. needless to say, he just thinks it's not only a horrible bill, but it's a very dangerous bill. And I told him what you had said. now so now you have to go in a public relations campaign and continue to try to do your best to try to act. But I said, Tim, this and he agreed with me. I said, this just puts you in such a difficult position because you want.

You're the insurance commissioner and you want insurance companies to come here by the same token. You can't downplay the potential adversarial effects of this bill that the governor just signed. So it just puts you in a very difficult position to try to sell Louisiana to insurance companies or anybody who wants to come here for that matter.

Danielle Walker (01:23:50.458)

Yeah.

Danielle Walker (01:24:02.79)

Yeah, what a disgrace. What an absolute disgrace this bill is. No thank you to representative Jeff Wiley and no thank you to everyone who voted for it. And maybe Chris, I think we should mention who voted against it, who voted, who did the right thing. That was the folks who voted against it. And in the house, there were 65 who voted for it, 36 who voted against it.

Chris Alexander (01:24:18.369)

who did the right thing.

Danielle Walker (01:24:29.284)

and they were representatives Beryl Omidy, Dennis Bamberg, Mike Bam, Stephanie Barral, Beth Billings, Chad Boyer, Josh Carlson, Dewith Carrier, Kim Carver, Emily Chenovere, Kim Coats, Raymond Cruz, Paula Davis, Jason Dewitt, Kelly Dickerson, Kathy Edmonston, Peter Egan, Gabe Firmat, Barbara Freiberg, Jay Galley, Brett Guyman, Troy Abear, Chance Henry, Big John Ilg,

Rodney Lyons, Danny McCormick, Dixon McMakin, Michael Melloran, Joe Angeron, Chuck Owen, Rodney Schammerhorn, Philip Tarver, Roger Wilder, Mark Wright, John Weibel, and Zee Zerang. In the Senate.

Chris Alexander (01:25:14.325)

all properly voted against it.

Danielle Walker (01:25:17.094)

Yes, and in the Senate, it passed 26 to 9, and those who voted rightly against it were Robert Allais, Adam Bass, Rick Edmonds, Senator Mike Fesi, Blake Miguez, Bob Owen, Thomas Presley, Alan Seabaw, and Bill Wheat. Valerie Hodges was absent, but her absence did not impact the final outcome.

Chris Alexander (01:25:43.159)

Yeah.

I think it is extremely important, this bill, for listeners to know how the Republicans voted, because this bill, unfortunately, is probably going to decimate much, if not all, of the hard work that was done on these other bills to try to get some insurance relief to citizens in Louisiana. And I just think it's very sad.

Danielle Walker (01:25:53.338)

Yeah.

Danielle Walker (01:26:08.804)

Yeah, I hope Commissioner Temple's got some good attorneys on this. also wonder if there's anyone who can sue for this. You could probably sue the state for this just if your insurance rates went up.

Chris Alexander (01:26:25.397)

Well, I can tell you what would definitely create a cause of action if the insurance commissioner under this new policy, if he goes back and orders insurance companies retroactively to refund premiums, or if he goes to policyholders and orders them retroactively to pay more money in premiums. The reason is because it is, first of all, it's what's called an ex post facto law. You can't

put, you can't make something either legal or illegal or call something excessive or not after the fact. These people have fulfilled their contractual obligations. The insurance company has fulfilled their contractual obligations. They have a contract in place and the government does not have the authority to interfere in private contracts. I think this could create a lot of litigation and probably will.

if the insurance commissioner tries to go back retroactively and do either one of those two things. But it's unfortunate that he's even in a position to be able to do so. That's the problem. And knowing that is going to be enough of a deterrent for a lot of insurance companies not to come here and probably even for lot of people who would otherwise ordinary citizens move here who won't if they know what this law is.

Danielle Walker (01:27:29.594)

but crit-

Danielle Walker (01:27:41.85)

But if you were an attorney advising Commissioner Temple right now, if you were on his staff, would you say, let's do this in some minor way? Let's bait a lawsuit so we can get this bill killed, so we can tie it up in the legal system, and then hopefully have it undone.

Chris Alexander (01:28:04.809)

I would not do that because I would not want Commissioner Temple to have the political fallout of doing that. In other words, because he's been critical of this bill, he has committed that he's not going to use this arbitrary authority. And even though I understand your point and that perhaps it could prove the point that I just made, that it's probably illegal, I don't think I would want Tim Temple to have to suffer the political fallout from that, from having to do that.

Danielle Walker (01:28:10.63)

Yeah.

Chris Alexander (01:28:32.747)

I really don't because what's going to happen? Of course, you know, his political enemies are going to start accusing him of, you know, being tyrannical or accuse him of violence. I just don't see how this works out well for him. So no, I would say you just need to do exactly what you have always done, which is to act honorably and do not use this power that you've now been given or else it makes him look intellectually morally inconsistent. And I think it also opens him up for a lot of political criticism.

Danielle Walker (01:29:03.012)

Yeah, well, he's probably opened up to a lot of political criticism unfairly anyway. So we'll see. I don't know. I'd like to think on that one. bet there's some way for him to...

Chris Alexander (01:29:08.245)

Either way, that's true.

Chris Alexander (01:29:14.637)

Yeah.

Chris Alexander (01:29:18.263)

to maybe test it out and see what happens there. this is the most dangerous, this is one of the top three most dangerous bills of the session. I put it right up there with SB 80, the bill that prohibits citizens from exercising their free speech rights. I think that's extraordinarily dangerous.

Danielle Walker (01:29:21.134)

Yeah. Yeah.

Chris Alexander (01:29:41.325)

Frankly, I put it up there with the cell phone bill because I think it's going to set a precedent that's going to absolutely sweep into all areas of our lives that people can't even foresee. So yeah, this 148 here is a monster, monster bill.

Danielle Walker (01:29:58.126)

Yeah, well, and 148 rounds us out for this session recap. Can you believe I mean, probably by the end of this, we've we've probably spent between I mean, on air, maybe six hours, but off air, countless hours, just recapping what happened this session and it is it's look, it's a mixed bag per usual.

Chris Alexander (01:30:21.887)

It's a mixed bag, but there's some good stuff in the bag because of a lot of hard work. And there would be some bad things in the bag that are not in there, but for a lot of hard work. you know, I just think we battled them in many respects on many bills to a draw. We lost some and we won some. So I think one thing I've noticed, Danielle, is we're getting stronger. We're getting stronger every year, getting more powerful every year. Our voice is getting more loud every year. And

Danielle Walker (01:30:33.093)

Yeah.

Danielle Walker (01:30:50.661)

Yeah.

Chris Alexander (01:30:52.673)

Every year, it affirms in my mind even more how much we are needed in this process. Several people have come up to me and told me, I certainly will be very sad if the state of freedom one day, it no longer exists or LCAG no longer exists because I don't know where we would be as a state if you weren't. And I'm not saying this to brag, I'm just telling you what people have told me about how important the work we do.

is.

Danielle Walker (01:31:22.446)

Yeah. And you know, Chris, we were talking at the beginning of this year or even at the end of last year when President Trump was elected and before he had even gotten inaugurated. And we said, this is no time to take your foot off the gas. We have to pound the gas even harder. We have to work even harder. And unfortunately, we were right. It's proven. It's proven true. Right. The conservatives in the legislature, quote unquote, the conservative majority did us no favors. Of course.

We do have a handful, probably two or three handfuls of consistently good legislators who do the will of the people who understand the role of their job, who understand and have respect for the Constitution. We're so grateful for them, but there's a whole slew of them who showed themselves this session, and I would like nothing more than to flush them out.

Chris Alexander (01:32:11.101)

Absolutely. And speaking of which, Danielle, about halfway through our scorecard on probably 18 to 20 bills that we consider to be extraordinarily important. And we're going to do an honest ranking of every rep and every senator based upon their posture on those bills, because they cover a wide variety of issues, but they're hugely important issues.

and they really are the acid test of whether or not someone is a Republican, a conservative Republican, and really has the best interest of the people at heart. How they voted and how they reflect on this scorecard is going to really tell you everything you need to know about your representative and whether or not they really stand with you on issues that really matter. So it's time to stop listening to what they tell you.

and start listening to what we tell you coupled with the objective evidence through our scorecards of their votes.

Danielle Walker (01:33:13.71)

Yeah. And Chris, I'll just take issue with one thing you said, which is who's a real Republican. I think real Republican is is completely lost at this point. Even the name Republican leaves a bad taste in my mouth. Am I a registered Republican? Yes. What else am I going to be? But they have done plenty of people have have have polluted the word so far.

Chris Alexander (01:33:28.747)

Yeah.

Danielle Walker (01:33:40.698)

You know, we're really faced with a uniparty system where people only call themselves Republicans now in the state of Louisiana, by and large, because that's what can get them elected. You cannot go by a moniker. You cannot go by a party title. You have to dig in and find out what these people are really about.

Chris Alexander (01:33:54.154)

Yes.

Chris Alexander (01:34:02.845)

I agree 100 % Danielle, the term Republican has been so sullied and so poisoned that it really is meaningless now. So I think I need to start substituting the word constitutionalist for Republican from now on. Citizen loving constitutionalists is what we need to do. Yeah, because the Uniparty is absolutely, I mean, it is the predominant

Danielle Walker (01:34:15.044)

Yeah.

There you go.

Yeah, I like that a lot.

Chris Alexander (01:34:31.533)

political force in our society now, and it involves Republicans and Democrats across the board. Danielle, I wouldn't be surprised, maybe I'd be marginally surprised, if on some of these bills that we're going to be focused on on our scorecard, if Democrats, if some Democrats rank higher than some Republicans, I wouldn't be surprised.

Danielle Walker (01:34:51.15)

Yeah, they will. Yep, Steven Jackson voted a lot with the Republicans on good bills. There's a handful. There's a handful. Daryl Adams as well. Pat Moore.

Chris Alexander (01:35:04.781)

Darrell Adams, think Pat Moore on a couple of, I mean, these are huge, huge issues that they joined Republicans on. So yeah, I wouldn't be surprised. And that would be a sad state of affairs for Republicans, if that is the case, but a hopeful sign also for Democrats, for some Democrats.

Danielle Walker (01:35:10.298)

Yeah. Yeah.

Danielle Walker (01:35:21.7)

Yeah, yeah, absolutely. Well, Chris, we will be taking off next week, a much needed, much deserved break, if I don't say so myself. So happy Fourth of July to everyone here. We will be back in the saddle on July 8th. And we have a really great guest lined up for you. I think our first guest is Professor Dave Clements coming back to talk about election integrity, progress with the administration.

any new executive orders that may be in the pike. So we're really looking forward to that conversation and switching gears out of session. But we will keep our eyes on what's happening in Louisiana. Don't you worry about that. We'll be keeping our eyes on the veto pen, the signing pen. you know, there's no, there's no lack of shenanigans that can happen even when the legislature is out of session. So we'll keep our eyes peeled. You keep your eyes peeled as well, please.

and alert us if there's stuff going on that we should be made aware of that you want us to raise a flag about or a flare about. We want to make sure that there's transparency in what's happening in Louisiana politics and we don't want to let people who want to behave like crooks get away with it scot-free.

Chris Alexander (01:36:36.831)

Not at all. they can't anymore. And as long as, you know, we are your family, the state of freedom and LACAG are your family. We are a family marching in the same direction and seeking to achieve the same objectives. And if you can find another organization like LACAG or like the state of freedom, another podcast like this that delivers the way that we do that has

singular loyalty to you and to the Constitution and to the rule of law, then I'd like to know about it. But in all humility, I don't think you're going to find it. We are it. We are for you and you are for us. So please support the state of freedom. Donate to the state of freedom. We are a citizen funded podcast as well as LACAG And we can win. We can prevail. We can continue to make the big difference we're making now.

but we need your support. We need your commitment to support us for whatever amount on a monthly basis you are comfortable supporting us with, but we need your support. have to have it. We are competing both with respect to our podcast and in the legislature and with regard to candidates when they run for office against powerful, powerful deep pocketed special interest groups that we refuse to accept any kind of financial support from.

precisely because we don't want to be compromised in any way, shape or form. So with citizens across Louisiana making the commitment to support us on a monthly basis, we will have everything that we need to fight and to win for you. And that's all we want to do is fight and win and of course reflect the glory of God and his purposes in the process.

Danielle Walker (01:38:24.452)

Yes, and Chris, I'll just mention as well that since now that we are the number two political podcast in the state of Louisiana, now that we have a proven track record, the state of freedom is pursuing sponsorships by local owned companies. So if you have an interest in sponsoring the state of freedom, having advertising on the state of freedom on air,

you just reach out to us. You can reach out to me at Danielle at freedomstate.us and I can send you the details about that.

Chris Alexander (01:38:54.505)

Yes, you send us a good product and we'll sell it.

Danielle Walker (01:38:58.726)

All right, Chris. Well, I guess that rounds us out for today. So we will be back on July 8th. Thank you, everyone, and God bless you.

Chris Alexander (01:39:10.04)

God bless you, Danielle. We'll see you soon.

...more

Share The State of Freedom

Sign up to save your podcasts

The State of Freedom

FAQs about The State of Freedom:

How many episodes does The State of Freedom have?

The State of Freedom episodes:

FAQs about The State of Freedom:

How many episodes does The State of Freedom have?