-
Sweet Home, Alabama
June 11, 2013 | 38 comments
-
Laying Down My Pen
May 24, 2013 | 0 comments
-
Laying Down My Pen
May 23, 2013 | 92 comments
-
Despite the WaPost, Benghazi Is a Major Scandal
May 21, 2013 | 46 comments
-
Putting Heritage in DeMint Condition
May 10, 2013 | 57 comments
Streetcar Line
Jindal Goes Mobile
Louisiana’s governor, on the move in ‘Bama.
MOBILE, Ala. — Probably no governor in the country has had as good a start to 2012 as Louisiana’s Bobby Jindal, who orchestrated a triumphant romp through his state’s legislature of the most sweepingly exciting education reforms any state has seen in 30 years. Jindal spoke Thursday in Mobile at a fundraiser for the Alabama Republican Party, providing a large dose of the infectious enthusiasm that has made him an unlikely but nearly unstoppable political power.
With a huge portion of the expected attendees held up in traffic by a bad wreck on a highway over Mobile Bay, organizers extended the time for the photo line with Jindal to give more people an opportunity to arrive. Jindal stood there patiently, thin as a wisp and smiling broad as Gomer Pyle, greeting person after person with an easy charm. “Very warm, very engaging,” said local political veteran Rhodes Prince afterward. “He looks you right in the eye. Great smile.”
When it came time for the speech, former congressman Jack Edwards, first elected in the Barry Goldwater southern sweep of 1964, introduced Jindal with the remarkable litany of the Louisianan’s career path: Rhodes scholar; secretary of his state’s Department of Health and Hospitals at age 25; president of the nine-campus, 80,000-student University of Louisiana system at age 28; assistant secretary of the federal Department of Health and Human Services at 30; congressman at 33; governor at 36; and re-elected last year in a 10-way race with a stunning 66 percent of the vote. Along the way, Jindal proved himself a master crisis-manager, receiving some of the only praise for any elected official in the wake of Hurricane Katrina and then acting as a creative-response dynamo in response to the BP oil spill.
A national audience might have trouble fathoming such a resumé for such a boyish figure who is eminently pleasant but devoid of any LBJ-like projection of power. After all, many Americans’ biggest exposure to Jindal was his sing-song, widely panned delivery of the Republican response to Barack Obama’s 2009 State of the Union address — hardly an impressive calling card, although the speech’s substance actually was better than its style.
But that sort of setting did not play to his strengths. Jindal isn’t a pomp-and-circumstance, behind-a-podium, read-from-a-teleprompter speaker. In Mobile, in a fighter-jet-filled pavilion next to the battleship U.S.S. Alabama, microphone in hand as he stood and sometimes paced casually around a simple riser, Jindal was more in his element. No notes, no carefully scripted eloquence; just a torrent of words, full of facts and sense and a smiling good humor.
He gracefully hit the right notes with a nice mention of Alabama’s (absent) Republican governor, Robert Bentley. He skillfully gutted Obama for a litany of broken promises — but, as a remarkably pleasant assassin, sounded off in sorrow, rather than with the angry tones or scolding demeanor of, say, a Rick Santorum on a bad day. He laid out a six-point plan for a national energy policy, managing to make it sound thorough and simple at the same time, wonkish enough to impress, but populist and uncomplicated enough to be readily understandable by any audience. (More permits; allow fracking; approve the Keystone pipeline; stop over-regulation; reject cap-and-trade; stop the crony capitalism represented by Solyndra and instead go to lower, flatter taxes across the board. Oh — and then, of course, the usual “all of the above” embrace of fuel sources from nuclear to wind to biodiesel, but without any special subsidies or advantages.)
He spent only a small time bragging about his own accomplishments in Louisiana — budget down 26 percent, unemployment rate below the national average every month of his governorship, best bond rating for the state in years, elimination of nearly 10,000 unnecessary full-time government positions — and then moved into a heartfelt paean to American opportunity and exceptionalism. He dinged the Occupy movement sweeping the country: “What they really are talking about is managing the slow decline of our country. That’s not the America where I grew up!” And, while still managing to sound anything but nasty, he again blasted Obama: “the most liberal ideological president since Jimmy Carter was in the White House. The most incompetent president since Jimmy Carter was in the White House.”
Jindal didn’t elaborate on the latter point during his speech, but the first chapter of his book, Leadership and Crisis, paints a harshly unflattering portrait of a mean-spirited, self-absorbed, clueless Obama during the oil-spill crisis. Most Americans have already forgotten just how inept and counterproductive the Obama administration was during those months; Jindal laid it all out with impressive detail.
Somewhat surprisingly, Jindal barely mentioned his recent triumphs in education policy, but I asked him about them afterward. The first part of his package involved an astonishing expansion of school choice throughout Louisiana. Building on the much-vaunted success of New Orleans schools since virtually the entire local system went “charter” after Katrina, the new legislation dramatically increases the pathways to creation of charters statewide, and streamlines the charter application process. It also expands Jindal’s earlier, somewhat voucher-like “Scholarships for Education Excellence Program” that lets students use public dollars to attend private schools. And it provides a dollar-for-dollar tax rebate for donations to “school tuition organizations” that provide scholarships.
“One of our school union leaders had come out and said that many poor parents don’t have a clue about how to make educational choices for the children,” Jindal told me. “To me, that is incredibly offensive, that bureaucratic, top-down, attitude. Who knows the child’s needs better: the parents, or the elitist, bureaucratic system? A child’s education should not be determined by his income or his zip code. We know that there are a lot of kids trapped in failing schools. We should allow the dollars to follow the children, not make the children try to follow the dollars.”
The second part of this year’s reforms involved a radical restructuring (and restricting) of teacher tenure. Tenure now will be awarded not based on longevity, but instead as a result of five years of “highly effective” ratings. Likewise, layoffs and compensation will be decided on merit as well, based on assessments of the performance of a teacher’s students. Also (and in accordance with ideas pushed by national reformer Philip K. Howard), far more authority and responsibility, without bureaucratic hindrances, will be afforded superintendents and school principals.
“The idea,” Jindal said, “is this: In the private sector, if you went to a business owner and said, ‘We’re going to make it almost impossible to fire your bad employees and reward your good ones,’ that small-business owner wouldn’t be able to stay in business for long. But understand this: We are indeed also rewarding those teachers who are doing a great job.”
Indeed, the administration claims that it has increased overall education spending by more than 9 percent even while cutting the total state budget by 26 percent, and now has provided generous merit pay for good results. Reforms in Jindal’s first term included a Teachers’ Bill of Rights that reduced paperwork burdens and gave them more disciplinary authority within the classroom.
First-term results — even before this year’s reforms — have been impressive. Graduation rates are up, dropout rates down, achievement scores up, test scores up, and Education Week rated Louisiana second in the nation this year for its standards and accountability.
“The status quo is just not acceptable,” Jindal said.
About the Author
Quin Hillyer is a senior editor of The American Spectator and a senior fellow at the Center for Individual Freedom. Follow him on Twitter @QuinHillyer.
Letter to the Editor View all comments (49) | Leave a comment
More Articles by Quin Hillyer
More Articles From Streetcar Line
http://spectator.org/archives/2012/05/14/jindal-goes-mobile
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
Current Issue
- Gabby Giffords Poisons the Well
- Happy Fourth
- Confessions of a Soft-Drinking Newspaperman
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
Zbigniew Mazurak | 5.14.12 @ 6:33AM
There's just one problem: Jindal is not a natural-born citizen and therefore is not eligible to be VP or President.
Von Mises Jr| 5.14.12 @ 7:39AM
Correct, as the attractive candidate Marco Rubio. But either or both would be great candidates for the Cabinet. Jindal would be perfect to replace Darn E. Skunkin.
Dick Nome| 5.14.12 @ 8:11AM
Why do you want to terminate their poitical careers at this early stage. Neither wants ot be VP. Both have a good future and both are natural born citizens.
loulou| 5.14.12 @ 3:55PM
They are not natural born US citizens.
They are NATIVE BORN US CITIZENS.
Von Mises Jr| 5.14.12 @ 5:32PM
Bingo loulou. The Republicans choosing either legitimizes the Manchurian alien.
Doctor Right| 5.14.12 @ 8:29AM
Wrong.
Jindal is a US Citizen. Always has been.
RCV| 5.14.12 @ 6:25PM
You can't discuss this rationally with the "natural born-means-what-I-say-it-means" crowd, Dr. R.
nedb| 5.14.12 @ 9:08AM
Jindal was born in the united states and is fully qualified in that circumstance to run for and hold the office of President.
Bill| 5.14.12 @ 11:50AM
ZM,
Your Barack Hussein Obama was born in Indonesia, and he bacame the President, 'cause he's a BLACK.
That's just politics.
Bobby jindal was born in LA.
RCV| 5.14.12 @ 6:26PM
This is the first I've heard that Obama was born in Indonesia, Bill.
SCPOret| 5.14.12 @ 1:19PM
Jindal was born in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, to Amar and Raj Jindal, who came to the United States as immigrants from Punjab, India, six months before he was born.
Mike Hawk| 5.14.12 @ 3:42PM
Legal immigrants with permanent resident status.
John G| 5.14.12 @ 8:06AM
Jindal was born in Louisiana.
Richard Ryan| 5.14.12 @ 8:33AM
Republican candidates should do more of this:
1. List the states with the worst fiscal situation, one by one. Then list the party in power in those states. Hammer home this point again and again and again. Which state would you like our country to most resemble?
2. Make our children the main theme of the election of 2012. Simply put: is it moral and right to bury our children in debt? Each and every dollar of that 16 Trillion will have to be taxed out of their wallets and their economy.
Keep it simple, repeat it often, thank you.
Albert Constantine Jr.| 5.14.12 @ 8:50AM
I think the issue of what is a natural born citizen needs to be defined and conflicts resolved between statutes and case law regarding this important constitutional requirement.
That said, I think Mr. Jindal continues to impress as a conservative leader with increasing substance, and hope that he will contunue to exert a positive influence and serve as a n example at a national level.
Rob| 5.14.12 @ 9:48AM
Jindal was born in the U.S., but at the time his parents were permanent resident aliens in the U.S., not U.S. citizens. In 1875, the Supreme Court in Minor v. Hapersett said: "“At common-law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners.” This decision arguably defines natural born citizens as those born within this country from two U.S. citizens as parents. By this definition, Obama, Jindal, and Rubio are all ineligible to serve as president.
Drunken Sailor| 5.14.12 @ 12:12PM
Natural-born citizen
Who is a natural-born citizen? Who, in other words, is a citizen at birth, such that that person can be a President someday?
The 14th Amendment defines citizenship this way: "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside." But even this does not get specific enough. As usual, the Constitution provides the framework for the law, but it is the law that fills in the gaps. The Constitution authorizes the Congress to do create clarifying legislation in Section 5 of the 14th Amendment; the Constitution, in Article 1, Section 8, Clause 4, also allows the Congress to create law regarding naturalization, which includes citizenship.
Currently, Title 8 of the U.S. Code fills in the gaps left by the Constitution. Section 1401 defines the following as people who are "citizens of the United States at birth:"
•Anyone born inside the United States *
•Any Indian or Eskimo born in the United States, provided being a citizen of the U.S. does not impair the person's status as a citizen of the tribe
•Any one born outside the United States, both of whose parents are citizens of the U.S., as long as one parent has lived in the U.S.
•Any one born outside the United States, if one parent is a citizen and lived in the U.S. for at least one year and the other parent is a U.S. national
•Any one born in a U.S. possession, if one parent is a citizen and lived in the U.S. for at least one year
•Any one found in the U.S. under the age of five, whose parentage cannot be determined, as long as proof of non-citizenship is not provided by age 21
•Any one born outside the United States, if one parent is an alien and as long as the other parent is a citizen of the U.S. who lived in the U.S. for at least five years (with military and diplomatic service included in this time)
•A final, historical condition: a person born before 5/24/1934 of an alien father and a U.S. citizen mother who has lived in the U.S.
* There is an exception in the law — the person must be "subject to the jurisdiction" of the United States. This would exempt the child of a diplomat, for example, from this provision.
Anyone falling into these categories is considered natural-born, and is eligible to run for President or Vice President. These provisions allow the children of military families to be considered natural-born, for example.
http://www.usconstitution.net/consttop_citi.html
Mike Hawk| 5.14.12 @ 3:42PM
I'm glad someone else post this instead of me. ( I have many times) Thanks DS. These other morons don't seem to have the wherewithall to go look it up. In case they doubt antthing we have put up, it is the law and can be attested to by legal counsel with gummint experience in this aspect.
loulou| 5.14.12 @ 3:57PM
Some morons like you are in denial.
Drunken Sailor| 5.14.12 @ 4:18PM
and some do not comprhend what they read. Now before anyone screams that this makes Obama a natural borne citizen. By this definition, it does.
However, many argue that since Obama moved to Indonesia, he had to give up his citizenship as Indonesia did not recognize dual citizenship and you had to be a Indonesian citizen to attend those schools. That would have made him a non-citizen of the US and barred him from being eligible for the presidency.
The U.S. Code does, however, see some acts as creating the possibility of a loss of nationality. When you lose your U.S. nationality, you are no longer under the protection or jurisdiction of the United States. When the United States considers you to no longer be of U.S. nationality, it in effect considers you to no longer be a citizen. Note that these are things you can do that may force you to lose your citizenship. The law also says that these acts must be voluntary and with the intent of losing U.S. citizenship. The ways to lose citizenship are detailed in 8 USC 1481:
•Becoming naturalized in another country
•Swearing an oath of allegiance to another country
•Serving in the armed forces of a nation at war with the U.S., or if you are an officer in that force
•Working for the government of another nation if doing so requires that you become naturalized or that you swear an oath of allegiance
•Formally renouncing citizenship at a U.S. consular office
•Formally renouncing citizenship to the U.S. Attorney General
•By being convicted of committing treason
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NeilBJ| 5.14.12 @ 4:29PM
The president must be a natural born citizen. The 14th amendment did not change that. It merely defined who is a citizen. And arguments continue to this day what "subject to the jurisdiction" means.
Rob is correct. Chief Justice Waite in Minor v. Happesett did recall the definition of natural born citizen as one born in a country of citizen parents.
In fact, the definition is legally binding since the court had to affirm for the record that Mrs. Minor was a citizen before it could adjudicate the case.
Had either of her parents been foreign born, the court said that some authorities would doubt that she was even a citizen, let alone a natural born citizen. The court did not have to resolve those doubts since Mrs. Minor was a citizen by virtue of being a natural born citizen.
W| 5.14.12 @ 4:41PM
DS
Good job. The supreme court case cited above does not define a natural born citizen and has not been accepted as such. Rubio and Jindall are eligible and Obama would not raise this issue.
NeilBJ| 5.15.12 @ 12:43PM
"[I]t was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners.”
I don't undestand how these sentences do not define a natural born citizen. Please explain your reasoning.
To paraphrase the above: Children born in a country of citizen parents are citizens. Furthermore, these children are natural born citizens.
Or: Children born in a country of citizen parents are not only citizens, they are natural born citizens.
Also note that natural born citizen is a constitutional construct. The definition can be changed only by a constitutional amendment. To cite laws that define citizen is irrelevent, since citizen and natural born citizen are two categories of citizenship. All natural born citizens are citizens, but all citizens are not natural born citizens.
W| 5.15.12 @ 4:15PM
The Constitution states "natural born citizens" but does not define it, just like the constitution does not define "free speech" or "probable cause" and other phrases. When it is not so clearly defined the Courts interpret and define the meaning. There is no need to amend the constitution because the constitution does not define natural born citizen and there is no direct court case on point. If there was a court case interpreting it then Congress can pass a law if it disagrees, unless the court case deals with a constitutional right like abortion.
The case you guys keep citing did not deal with defining the phrase, that was not the issue. If there was a clear court case on point then there would be no debate. To the extent the court case deals with citizenship then the laws passed by congress control.
Alky| 5.14.12 @ 11:16AM
Make him President and watch the libs set their hair on fire saying he's not eligible LOL.
JohnM| 5.14.12 @ 12:06PM
The Dems went through the trouble to verify McCains "Natural Born" status before the election. They will just rely on the incompetence of the Repiblican Party again.
Bill| 5.14.12 @ 11:52AM
Gov. Jindal dismantled corrupt Dem machine in LA, which has been dominating the politics through corruption and abuse, and Jindal dumped those big government liberals in the Gulf of Mexico. Well done, Bobby!
Oldefarte| 5.14.12 @ 1:51PM
A Rhodes scholar with COMMON SENSE, now there's a combination. Whether VP or cabinet official, he would definately add impressive credentials to a administrative roster!!!!!
Monica | 5.14.12 @ 2:58PM
Wow you boys will beleive anything, or so it seems. What Jindal says and what he does are far from being the same thing. Ask yourselfwhy there is a recall movement- and this is bigger than teachers. All over the state people are asking for the petition . VP of the USA? Oh no, not good.
Drunken Sailor| 5.14.12 @ 4:21PM
You mean the recall started by 5 teachers that were against his proposals to re-vamp the state's education system?
Good Luck with meeting the state's requirments for a recall
To trigger a recall election, one-third of the state's 2.86 million registered voters would have to sign petitions within 180 days.
Oldefarte| 5.15.12 @ 11:24AM
Who started that recall....David Duke?????
Oldefarte| 5.15.12 @ 11:25AM
PS: Maybe Morial or Nagin?????
jaytrain| 5.14.12 @ 2:59PM
Btw, no self respecting conservative would appear on stage w/ Bentley : he is wholly owned by the teachers union here in Al . He, Bentley ,may be a republican but he ain't no conservative . And it's time we start making tht distinction
Dick Nome| 5.14.12 @ 3:20PM
Jack and Clint on Suicide watch folks!! Rube Paul is out. No brokered convention. That's OK, he'll be back in 2016 at age 80 if he doesn't fall off his bike while riding in the 100 degree heat. Put on you foil hats Paulbots.
Crassus| 5.14.12 @ 4:06PM
Praise the Lord and pass the liquor bottle!!!
Drunken Sailor| 5.14.12 @ 4:22PM
I'll drink to that.
Occam's Tool| 5.15.12 @ 12:41AM
Well, as the MST3K crowd would say about Paul (and they DO dislike him): "Paul peppered in G-d's Lo Mein."
Always good to see Ron Paul lose. Crassus, you are a Great American!
Oldefarte| 5.15.12 @ 11:22AM
Suiside watch?......who is watching?????
Greg| 5.14.12 @ 4:43PM
Jindal isn't a great speaker. Not even really a good one. He is it seems a very good governor who has managed to turn Louisiana red,not just in presidential voting either.
James Lee| 5.14.12 @ 6:02PM
Sorry Bobby does not get my vote for "Magic conservative" As a Louisiana resident and a conservative I find all this fawning over him to be just a little ridiculous. Try asking the residents of Louisiana their thoughts. He's not above a little underhanded back room maneuvering, and friendly little payoffs.
Old Joe| 5.14.12 @ 7:22PM
I live in Louisiana, I am a conservative, and I love Governor Bobby. He ain’t perfect but he is a hell of a lot better than what we had my first 31 years as a resident of this great state. I am damn proud to have voted for him for everything he has ever run for.
Greg| 5.14.12 @ 9:56PM
My great aunt ran the New Orleans school system back in the 1930s. It was probably at a higher level then.
Lucius Severus Pertinax| 5.14.12 @ 9:03PM
Dear Louisiana,
Can we please borrow your governor for awhile?
The Taxpayers,
California
Will| 5.15.12 @ 2:05AM
Yeah sure, live in Louisiana and not one thing in this article is true... The one thing you have to remember is that politics are bought and payed for buy those with money and they trick you into thinking you vote counts.. it doesn't you just decide what people get the kickbacks for the next four years
Will| 5.15.12 @ 2:09AM
We need to bring back Edwin Edwards!! Or David Duke those were two fine Republican Candidates.
Old Joe| 5.15.12 @ 5:50PM
You idiot, Edwards was a Democrat.
Brad9883| 5.14.12 @ 11:16PM
"He dinged the Occupy movement sweeping the country..."
Sorry, but there is no "Occupy movement sweeping the country."
It's manufactured, at best. And it's fizzling, if you hadn't noticed.
POST American| 5.14.12 @ 11:44PM
-------'90's Show' sideshow DIS---tractions.
MEANWHILE, the living and awake will
be making every effort to get to the coming
BILDERBERG Globalist pow-wow at the
Westfield's Marriott Hotel, near Dulles Airport
in Washington D.C.
---------------BE THERE!
-----------------------or BEEEE a SLAVE!
----------------HUAC/ Nuremberg 2012---------------
"Understand, this is a war! A war against
ALLLLL that was. A war against the HUMAN
iself. This is the FINAL stage of the roll out
of ------- 'PSY--ANT---ific WORLD
Dick--tator-ship'.
---French Fries!
---------'Free---dumb' fries!
--------------'PSY--ant-ific DICK--tators!
------------------JUST KEEP ON TRUCKIN'!!!
CAUSE ---YOU ARE THERE!
GENE HAUBER| 5.15.12 @ 6:21PM
I have a plan to destroy obama once and for all in the eyes of all people with any sense at all.
Let obama choose the topics/issues and then put him in a debate with GOV.BOBBY JINDAL, the lowly governor of Louisiana who will then proceed to politically slaughter him.........I would watch that!!