News -> Cover Story

Frankly Speaking

CoverU.S. Rep. Jeff Landry appears so eager to challenge Lafayette Congressman Charles Boustany this fall he might have broken federal law to build name recognition in Lafayette.
By Walter Pierce


Jeff Landry, the freshman GOP congressman from New Iberia, spent last Wednesday wowing supporters with his fiscal fortitude at the back door of the man he hopes to replace next year in the Congress. The Cade Community Center where the town hall meeting was held is at the very western edge of Landry’s 3rd Congressional District, practically in spitting distance of the 7th Congressional District represented by U.S. Rep. Charles Boustany, R-Lafayette.

Landry hasn’t announced his intention to challenge Boustany on Nov. 6, but all indications are that he will, and he’s been trying to build his brand in Southwest Louisiana — by attending town hall meetings in Lafayette and Lake Charles with his apparent mentor, Sen. David Vitter (and other events), and by firing off a regular stream of email press releases via his Washington office to newspapers in Boustany’s district. He’s also done it utilizing what’s known among members of Congress as his franking privilege — that is, using taxpayer dollars to cover the cost of keeping in touch with his constituents back home by a number of means, including mass mailings, robocalls and newspaper inserts. It’s that last category that could make Landry the subject of a congressional ethics probe.

An antique term for signature, the frank was established during the Continental Congress and originally referred to a congressional member substituting his signature for a stamp. Since the 1990s federal law has prohibited members of Congress from using their frank to contact people outside their district, non-constituents in other words. But Landry did just that late last year when his office paid nearly $1,000 to insert a “Year End Report” in The Independent, which circulates almost exclusively in Lafayette Parish, AKA Boustany’s district. The insert was purchased three weeks after The Ind featured Landry on our cover in an article critical of what we characterized as his boorish behavior, notably his holding that “DRILLING = JOBS” sign during President Obama’s address to a joint session of Congress last September. (Bumper stickers based on the sign are now being sold, and the phrase figures prominently in the insert. In fairness, drilling does equal jobs. But so do supermarkets, hog farms and porn shops.) The insertion was purchased by Littlefield Consulting Services out of Alexandria, Va.

A thousand bucks isn’t much in federal government terms — the cost of printing the folded, glossy, full-color insert no doubt is much more than actually inserting it in newspapers and would also have been paid for by the franking privilege — but Landry’s political raison d’etre is out-of-control Washington spending, and blowing a couple grand to reach virtually none of his constituents runs afoul of that theme. And more important than the cost is whether Landry broke federal law. We think he did.

Cover1
‘NO WAY THEY COMPLIED WITH THE LAW’

Congressional communications via items like newspaper inserts in quantities of 500 or more are reviewed by the Franking Commission, a bi-partisan body that’s part of the House of Representatives’ Committee on House Administration. The Franking Commission’s job is to ensure such items conform to their intended purpose: communicating with constituents, keeping them apace of the issues and developments in Congress as opposed to campaigning or politicking. (The insert in question, we must observe, reads much more like a push card than a year-end report.) House members must submit a sample of the item they want covered by the franking privilege. The House Commission on Congressional Mailing Standards reviews said items and issues an advisory opinion on whether the item is frankable. If it is, the cost of producing and disseminating it is paid for by us, the taxpayers. Moreover, lawmakers are required to indicate in their franking application that the item will be distributed in their own districts. There’s a manual, “Regulations on the use of the Congressional Frank by Members of the House of Representatives” that spells it all out in about 70 mind-numbing pages.

Cover2
Cover3
Rep. Jeff Landry’s 3rd Congressional District,
skirts the edge of Lafayette Parish where
The Independent is distributed. Only one
Ind distribution point — at the Mel’s Diner on U.S. 90
— is in the 3rd CD, and barely at that.

We know the insert was paid for with tax dollars because it bears the disclaimer, “Paid for by official funds authorized by the House of Representatives,” which cleaves somewhat obliquely to an admonishment in the Franking Manual: “Public law 104-197, enacted in 1996, requires that all mass mailings bear the following disclaimer statement: ‘This mailing was prepared, published and mailed at taxpayer expense,’ or a notice to the same effect...” The disclaimer on Landry’s insert avoids the phrase “at taxpayer expense,” which is kryptonite to the far right, but “funds authorized by the House of Representatives” is something to that effect.

But here’s a catch: While the Franking Commission is in charge of reviewing materials, it doesn’t review where the material is being distributed. It’s more or less an honor system. The panel does, however, routinely remind lawmakers via a newsletter about the various rules regarding the franking privilege, chiefly that franked materials cannot be distributed 90 days before an election the lawmaker is a candidate in and that the material must be for his or her constituents.

Constituent communications also fall under the broader scope of the Committee on House Administration. The “Members’ Handbook” issued by the CHA related to newspaper inserts reads, “Ordinary and necessary expenses related to the production and distribution of newspaper inserts are reimbursable. The content must be in compliance with the Franking Regulations (emphasis ours).”

Meanwhile over in the Franking Manual: “A Member of the House of Representatives may not send any mass mailing outside the congressional district from which the member was elected.”

Some may be willing to quibble over whether a newspaper insert constitutes a mass mailing, but a source in Washington, D.C., with intimate knowledge of the franking process isn’t one of them: “There’s no way they complied with the law; it’s so black and white,” says the source, who asked not to be identified for this story due to the apparent illegality of the situation. “He’s a freshman [congressman], but I can’t imagine you can make that kind of mistake — he couldn’t be that ignorant of the law. There’s clearly a problem here — a major problem.”

The insert itself is fairly innocuous with a few photos of Landry (one of which shows him on the KLFY news set with Blue Rolfes, a popular TV figure in Lafayette mm-hmm) and headers like “Cosponsors Pro-Life Legislation,” “Leading a House Coalition in Blocking the President’s Nominees” and “Cosponsors Legislation to Strip Members of Congress from Their Pensions” — pablum intended to tickle the political palates of Landry’s far-right base.

Cover4
The glossy, full-color “Year End Report” distributed
to constituents at the end of 2011 enumerates
Landry’s conservative credentials and
reinforces his “DRILLING = JOBS” mantra,
which can now be seen emblazoned on bumper stickers.

Landry ran the same insert in The Daily Iberian, his hometown newspaper and one that serves a fair swath of his 3rd Congressional District. That’s perfectly legal and above board — the Iberian reaches his constituents. He could also legally run the insert in any paper that circulates primarily in the 3rd Congressional District. But not, according to our source, in The Independent or The Daily Advertiser, the latter of which he also used as a vessel for the insert.

Millard Mulé, Landry’s communications director and the source of the near-daily official emails we get at The Ind, deflected questions about the legality of the insert to the Franking Commission: “Franking approved everything on our end. If you have a question that would be a Franking [Commission] question.”

Steve Dutton, the Franking Commission’s press secretary, was of little help: “I have looked into this and without knowing all of the details regarding this particular matter I can’t give definitive guidance,” he replied in an email response late last week.

‘SELF-PROMOTING’ ANTICS

Why in the first place would a congressman from southeast Louisiana need to generate name recognition outside his district? Because next year Boustany and Landry will share the same district. Landry’s 3rd CD will cease to exist in 2013 due to Louisiana’s loss of one of its seven U.S. House districts as a result of the 2010 census, an issue that was settled once and for all last month when the U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear Louisiana’s appeal. Landry’s hometown of New Iberia will be absorbed into Boustany’s southwest Louisiana 7th CD, which next year will become known as the 3rd Congressional District. In effect Landry is losing his congressional district. He wants to remain a congressman. The pay is pretty good — $174,000 per year — and the power and prestige are even better. To keep the perks and the paycheck Landry will need to beat Boustany head to head this November. So he’s eager to build name recognition in Boustany’s turf. And the time line is perfect: If Landry can beat Boustany this fall he could serve a two-year term in the House, remain in the political spotlight, spread his brand west across South Louisiana and then run against U.S. Sen. Mary Landrieu in 2014, a contest many political watchers have been anticipating — several of whom believe Landry could win. If he opts not to go after Boustany, Landry will be out of the political spotlight for at least a year before ramping up a campaign against Landrieu.

But Landry has yet to publicly commit to running against Boustany. “I don’t know; that’s a question for Jeff,” says Mulé.

Cover5
U.S. Rep. Charles Boustany, R-Lafayette, has announced
his intention to seek re-election this fall. His likely
opponent is hard-charging House colleague Jeff Landry.

Landry Chief of Staff Phillip Joffrion insists the insert was done in good faith and suggests this story is really about bias on our part. “Y’all aren’t a conservative-based paper — we know that. I think all of Acadiana knows that,” he says. “I’ll never know what your motive is for trying to put this story together, but to be honest with you I don’t believe that we violated the franking rules; I don’t think that we violated the spirit of the rules. It was with good intentions that The Independent services the 3rd Congressional District. Again as recently as this week we found racks within St. Martin Parish, which is entirely within the current 3rd Congressional District and reaches our constituents.”

Truth be told, we do have a single distribution rack in St. Martin Parish — at the Mel’s Diner on U.S. 90, about 500 yards into the 3rd Congressional District. So there’s that.

Boustany was unavailable for comment for this story, but Neal Patel, his communications director who handles press inquiries, was blunt when asked about Landry’s possible franking violation.

“These are very serious allegations that must be handled accordingly by the Franking Commission, and if need be, the Office of Congressional Ethics,” Patel writes in an email response. “The purpose and intent of the frank is for members of Congress to correspond with and be held accountable to constituents within the district they represent. Above all else, it must never be forgotten this interaction is a privilege afforded to Congress through the use of taxpayer dollars.”

“I’m surprised someone hasn’t raised issue with this before,” adds our Beltway source, who doesn’t believe the Landry camp can claim ignorance of the law for the transgression.

Patel is more frank: “These antics are exactly the type of self-promoting behavior hard-working Americans are tired of seeing in Washington.”

By all appearances Landry is a competent albeit feverishly conservative congressman. If he beats Boustany this fall — the race could be seen as a referendum on the Tea Party, which made minced meat of many a mainstream Republicans in the 2010 GOP primaries but, according to numerous polls, has fallen into disfavor with a majority of Americans — Southwest Louisiana will lose a lot of seniority and the plum committee assignments that go along with Boustany’s four terms in office and close relationship with House Speaker John Boehner.

But that’s a big if. Rep. Landry may be lugging the baggage of an ethics investigation by the time November rolls around.


Walter Pierce
About the author:


Comments (20)add
...
written by Terry DuPuy , April 11, 2012 - 06:58 am
I sense a double standard here. Your paper probably delights in boasting of its extensive readership. I am sure your advertising sales department has favorable demographics showing your reach into areas beyond Lafayette City/Parish. You would pride yourself as being more of a regional print medium then a strictly "local" paper (meaning only within the city of Lafayette.) As an owner of business interests in St Martin and Iberia Parishes, and having lived outside of Lafayette, I can attest that many citizens outside of Lafayette/Lafayette Parish indeed DO read your paper.

In a quick glance of recent online editions, I notice stories about a New Iberia girl receiving a marrow transplant, controversy about a song played on a Eunice radio station, a story about a Morgan City company expanding and adding jobs, a local musician playing at New Iberia's Guggenheim, a giant garage sale happening between two towns in St Landry Parish, an art exhibit in Breaux Bridge, a circus type event in Crowley, a doll workshop in New Iberia, a "movie night" in New Iberia, a crawfish cook-off in Ville Platte, etcetera….

Your entertainment "grid" has routine listings for clubs in Henderson, Breaux Bridge and Eunice. I see real estate ad listings for houses in Sunset, Breaux Bridge and other surrounding areas.

On any weekday morning, go out to Hwy. 90 and take note of the "parking lot" of traffic coming into Lafayette from outlying areas. These people may live outside of Lafayette but work here. They probably pick up a copy or your paper during lunch or breaks.

My point is: You conveniently portray your paper as an exclusively "Lafayette" entity when it suits your slant in the story about Mr. Landry's "franking" newsletter/advertisement inserts. However, it is evident that your reach is far from the confines of Lafayette Parish.

You can't have your cake and eat it too. I am not a supporter of Mr. Landry, however I am a supporter of fair journalism.
...
written by Walter Pierce , April 11, 2012 - 03:14 pm
Terry,
It's true, we write stories about other towns outside Lafayette Parish. But our circulation -- where our newspapers are physically distributed -- is entirely inside Lafayette Parish, save for a few dozen copies placed in a rack at the Mel's Diner in the St. Martin Parish part of Broussard.
Let's make the assumption that every copy of our paper at that Mel's diner is picked up by a St. Martin Parish resident (that's certainly not the case; it's probably mainly Lafayette folks who dine there, but let's assume) or in other words Landry constituents. That's 30 or 40 of his constituents he reached at that location. Let's further assume that among the dozens of other locations where we have racks in Lafayette Parish, that 150 people from St. Martin or Iberia Parish are in Lafayette shopping and pick up a copy of The Ind. Now we're at just under 200 Landry constituents with our newspaper and his Year End Report in their hands. So the congressman paid a couple thousand dollars of taxpayer money to reach a couple hundred of his constituents. That comes to about $100 per constituent.
Would you say that's a wise investment? An efficient expenditure of tax dollars? Spent by a fiscal hawk like Landry?
That's the real double standard.

...
written by Walter Pierce , April 11, 2012 - 03:19 pm
Jason,
You need to use your full name to post comments per our policy adopted late last year.
...
written by Michael A. Moss , April 11, 2012 - 11:47 pm
Jason you need to man-up bro!! Also, Terry are you a Landry fan? If so you need to tell him to play by the rules. People in Boustany's district don't like liars or peeps who don't play by the rules!! This is a NO SPIN ZONE!!
...
written by Ted Broussard , April 12, 2012 - 12:37 pm
I think that what is interesting here is the hypocrisy of this article. You gladly took the money and then did a story about the illegality of the payment. In most cases, if you knowingly participate in a crime, you are culpable.
...
written by Ralph Peters , April 12, 2012 - 01:15 pm
May have violated a law? Then logically you may be an accomplice by accepting the money to distribute the insert. Yet, you sell advertising to how many companies that do business in that area? Then I challenge you The Independent, show us how serious you are, refuse to sell any advertising to anyone who does business outside of Lafayette Parish. That is just as ridiculous as printing a story about someone may have broken a law by publishing an insert in your paper? This is just another case of yellow journalism, a typical media attempt to create controversey where none exists.
...
written by Walter Pierce , April 12, 2012 - 01:48 pm
We weren't aware of the illegality until weeks after the report was inserted, Ted. More important, the edit staff isn't involved in sales/advertising. Ind writers saw the insert in the paper for the first time on Wednesday, Dec. 28, 2011 just like our readers.
And I'm sure you're not suggesting that our sales staff was aware of federal franking rules when approached about the insert and unscrupulously took Landry's money anyway. (Oh, wait, it wasn't Landry's money; it was your money and my money and the money of everyone who pays federal taxes.)
...
written by Walter Pierce , April 12, 2012 - 02:22 pm
Ralph,
See my previous comment directed at Ted concerning collusion on our part.
I just looked through a few recent issues of The Ind and there are no businesses outside Lafayette advertising with us except for casinos, which obviously are trying to lure Lafayette residents.
Would you still be an apologist for Landry if he had squandered $1 million instead of just a couple thousand?
Yellow journalism my ass.
...
written by Dudley E. LaBauve, III , April 12, 2012 - 03:08 pm
Whew, Walter's feisty today!
...
written by Jeremiah Supple , April 12, 2012 - 04:12 pm
Walter,
As the "The Gipper" would say, "There you go again". The agenda of the Independent is becoming more and more apparent, and we all know it’s got nothing to do with journalism or being Independent. The very name is disingenuous.
...
written by Ted Broussard , April 12, 2012 - 08:30 pm
You should return the money!!!
...
written by Michael A. Moss , April 12, 2012 - 10:54 pm
Why should the Ind. not take money for advertisments? That is why the paper is free. Ya'll are trying to change the subject of the article. It is about him violating the Franking rules. Do ya'll think everyone is dumb and will fall for the oldest trick in the political book? Landry is a "POLITICAL WHORE" plain and simple. And his mentor, Vitter is a "WHORE MONGER". So ya'll smoke on DAT for awhile!!
...
written by Ted Broussard , April 12, 2012 - 11:52 pm
So, let me get this straight....this is NOT YELLOW journalism, right? Then how come Wally's comments are highlighted in yellow, eh?
...
written by Walter Pierce , April 13, 2012 - 12:39 am
Ted, dude, good one!
Seriously.
...
written by Robert L. Broussard , April 13, 2012 - 10:11 am
"By all appearances Landry is a competent albeit feverishly conservative congressman." Albeit? As in "although" or "even if?" In my view, this word usage demonstrates a that either the author or The Independent (or both) believe that competence and feverish conservatism are mutually exclusive or rare. If the story would be about an avowedly liberal representative, would the Ind write, "By all appearances, (Pelosi, Waxman, Frank, etc.) is a competent albeit feverishly liberal congressperson"? Or would the word "and" be used in place off "albeit"? Musings from a Boustany voter who intends to vote for Boustany again, whether Landry runs against him or not.
...
written by Michael A. Moss , April 13, 2012 - 12:25 pm
Folks, the article was about violating the rules of Franking. Now do ya'll think he violated the rules or not?
...
written by Terry DuPuy , April 13, 2012 - 10:01 pm
I think the best answer to the question is whether these "Year End Reports" were solely distributed in the Independent, or were there inserts in other papers throughout Landry's district. That information would quickly help establish whether this was a brash violation, targeting Lafayette readers or just a thorough coverage, using the Ind as a viable circulation source for areas on the fringe of the district in St Martin and Iberia Parishes.
...
written by Walter Pierce , April 14, 2012 - 02:06 am
It doesn't matter, Terry. The rules are explicit: don't use the frank to communicate with non-constituents.
Landry is a relatively affluent fellow; he could have afforded a couple grand out of his own pocket to insert the report in a paper outside his district and it would have been perfectly legal. He chose instead to use your and my money.
When he runs against Boustany this fall he'll spend a king's ransom in Boustany country but he'll use campaign funds, not our taxes, to do it and it will be absolutely OK.
...
written by chano leal , April 16, 2012 - 07:40 pm
Did you inbred couillions know that the english name
" Jesse, is an english male gender version of the hebrew name " Jesus, did ya'll know that the latin name " Yessie is a latin feminine version of the hebrew name of Jesus........And have you Couillions ever wondered why some peeps become politicians, and some of us have nevah had to use any Lysol Lip Balm, well its like this : The largesse in political circles is an all too tempting trapping for fresh out of the closet, insipid, immoral, lowlife's. Duh-Uh
So lets get back to the Article by My nephew Walter, RE: Franking as in the case of the state of Arkansaw vesus Hillary Clinton, the ruling sets a precedent, and still today up held by the highest court in the nation, " Franking was approved by a politico in 1708 by an elected Magistrate in the township of Fric-Fracking, West Virginia, this practice which is known as Franking has become synonym with the name of Stamping Wastrel Franking, who was accused and found guilty of sending postcard bulletins announcing his Fish Market sale of CodFish Boulets, thru the U.S. Postal System and billing the Township for the mailed bulletins. In 1708 the township court of Fric-Fracking, West Virginia sentenced the magistrate " to be hung by his neck until he stopped kicking and twitching, or until the cows come home, whichever came first..the thievin dolt was hung by his neck until his last twitch.

You must be logged in to post a comment. Log in using your Facebook account or register if you do not have an account yet.

busy 
LA LA Land
Advertisement

Read the Flipping Paper!

Click Here for the Entire Print Version of
IND Monthly
Most Read
Advertisement
Advertisement
in case you missed it