The voters of Louisiana reject 4 constitutional amendments, handing over to Landry a major defeat • Louisiana illuminator

In an astonishing rejection of the Republican governor Jeff Landry, the voters of Louisiana refused its four constitutional amendments on Saturday, including the plan of the governor to revise the tax and budgetary laws of the State.

Almost two thirds of voters have rejected all the amendments in an election that could have broader political implications for the rest of Landry’s mandate.

The governor, who sometimes relied on tactics with strong arms to pass his agenda through the Louisiana legislative assembly, could become more vulnerable to repression after having failed to adopt his most ambitious policy proposal during the ballot box.

Landry’s priority for elections, amendment 2, would have reduced the maximum tax rate that the State could adopt and limit the increases in the annual state budget. It would also have made it more difficult to promulgate new tax reductions.

The proposal was to produce a financial windfall for the legislators of Landry and the States later this year. Amendment 2 would have moved hundreds of millions of dollars in tax revenue of state savings accounts to the General Fund of Louisiana, where the legislators of Landry and the States could have spent it more easily.

Landry had attempted to soften the voters on amendment 2 by linking it to the remuneration of public school teachers. If it had passed, temporary allowances worth $ 2,000 and $ 1,000 that teachers and school support have received in the past two years should become permanent.

Now, educators are at risk of a salary reduction because Landry has not included money for their allowance in its current budget proposal.

In a declaration after the result was certain, the governor awarded the defeat of amendment 2 to the billionaire George Soros, a survivor of the Holocaust, born in Hungarian, which the conservatives have targeted for several years for his support for liberal causes.

“Soros And the far -left liberals poured millions in Louisiana with propaganda and lies outright on amendment 2, “said Landry.” Although we are disappointed with this evening results, we don’t consider it a failure. We realize how difficult a positive change can be to implement in a condition conditioned to failure. … This is not the end for us, and we will continue to fight to bring generational changes to Louisiana to succeed. »»

The most recent tax files available show that the foundations of the Open Soros companies gave $ 1.25 million in 2023 to a subsidiary of the Vera Institute of Justice, which put money in the efforts to defeat amendment 3. It is not clear if one of these money has been spent in Louisiana.

Landry had support for amendment 2 from another controversial billionaire. The conservative republican Charles Koch is the founder of Americans for Prosperity, a group struck at the doors, directed telephone banks and sent the mailbox in favor of the proposal.

The opponents of Amendment 2 celebrated his defeat on Saturday evening. They include William Most, a lawyer who continued without success for the proposal to be withdrawn from the ballot. He argued that the language submitted before the voters was convoluted and misleading, which makes it illegal.

“I think it is a full -fledged rejection of attempts to encourage the voters of Louisiana to vote for something they do not want,” said most. “… This sends a clear message that if state officials want to change our constitution, they cannot do it by cunning or deception.”

Landry and the legislature dominated by the Republicans could have inadvertently inadvertently the public opposition in Amendment 2 by putting it on the same ballot as amendment 3, a measure of justice for minors who attracted the anger of the democrats and national anti-incarceration groups.

Amendment 3, to whom 66% of the voters opposed, would have facilitated the sending of minors to prisons and prisons for adults for longer sentences. He prompted national criminal justice reform organizations, such as the Vera Institute and the Southern Poverty Law Center, to spend more than $ 500,000 to return the voters.

Sarah Omojola, director of Louisiana for the Vera Institute, said that the results of amendment 3 show that voters are starting to reject incarceration as the only option for criminal justice. She added that high incarceration rates only served to destabilize communities rather than reducing crime.

“By beating amendment 3, the voters have clearly indicated their desire for things that really make our communities safer – such as quality education and opportunities,” Omojola said in a statement.

Who pays for the constitutional modification campaigns of Louisiana? It is above all a secret.

While these organizations focused on the defeat of amendment 3, they also became the backbone of a “not on all” campaign working to vote for the four constitutional amendments that Landry pushed.

Supporters of the tax proposal in Amendment 2 said they thought that the question of criminal justice had a negative effect on their measure in the interviews earlier this week.

“(Amendment 3) is a huge motivation of the groups that say no to everything.

The Landry team began to find trouble at the start of the voting period for the elections. John Couvillon, an experienced sounder in Louisiana, said that black democrats and voters presented themselves in much higher number than the Republicans at the start of the voting period.

“I have never seen such a strong anticipated vote (for democrats),” said Couvillon.

In addition to amendment 3, Couvillon said that left -wing voters may also be motivated to vote due to the concerns of President Donald Trump. Landry is closely aligned with the Trump administration.

However, the opposition to amendment 2, and the budget and the tax changes, also come from certain conservative activists. Religious groups and non -profit organizations were dissatisfied, the modification would have weakened the constitutional protections for the exemptions from the property tax which they enjoy.

Woody Jenkins, President of the Redroom Republican Party and former state representative, was one of those who opposed the amendment. In an interview on Saturday evening, he noted that even if “the whole political establishment of the State” supported the proposals, the voters had trouble digesting amendment 2.

“Public members do not want to vote on something they don’t understand,” said Jenkins. “… they don’t want a massive revision of the Constitution with everything except the sink of the kitchen.”

The defeat of modifications 2 and 3 also led to the fall in amendment 1, which failed with 65% of voters against the proposal. This would have enabled the training of specialized courts in Louisiana with competence outside the current parish and judicial districts.

Amendment 4 also failed, with 64% of voters. He would have adjusted the rules for the special elections to fulfill vacant or new judgments, mainly at the Supreme Court of Louisiana.