www.thecentersquare.com – By Nolan McKendry | The Center Square – (The Center Square – ) 2025-04-29 21:57:00
(The Center Square) — Legislators rejected eight bills on Tuesday that would have greatly hindered the development of carbon capture and sequestration, a major blow to Louisiana constituents concerned about eminent domain and CO2 leaks.
Only one bill moved through the House Natural Resources Committee.
Sen. Mike Reese, R-Beauregard, had his measure,Senate Bill 73, pass without objection. The bill requires the commissioner of conservation to give significant weight to local government input when making decisions on carbon dioxide sequestration projects that involve public comments or hearings.
Marketed as a way to reduce carbon emissions, carbon and capture and sequestration allows various industries to market their products as low carbon to international and domestic markets.
According toLouisiana Economic Development, there is currently $23 billion in carbon capture related investments in the state, with a projected 4,500 jobs.
The committee met for more than 13 hours.
Opposition to the bills included industry and parish leaders from all over Louisiana such as Anna Johnson, president of the West Baton Rouge Chamber of Commerce, Ray Gregson, executive director of the River Regions Chamber of Commerce, Michael Hecht,president & CEO of Greater New Orleansand representatives from the Louisiana Association of Business and Industry, Entergy, the Louisiana Oil and Gas Association and Landowners Association.
The technology is a potential “game changing opportunity,” according to the River Region Chamber of Commerce.
The regional chamber recently announced strong support for carbon capture and sequestration, calling the technology essential to securing billions in industrial investment, creating high-quality jobs, and maintaining Louisiana’s competitive edge in global energy markets.
Citing the2024-25 Louisiana Economic Forecastby economist Dr. Loren Scott, the chamber emphasized that more than $150 billion in industrial projects across three metro areas are tied to the successful implementation of CCS and access to renewable energy.
Beyond economics, the chamber argued CCS is a proven, safe technology that has operated in the U.S. for decades, with more than 200 million tons of CO₂ safely stored underground since the 1970s. It said supporting CCS can both reduce emissions and modernize the state’s energy infrastructure without relying on restrictive energy policies or mandates.
The chamber also emphasized job creation, noting that the state’s oil and gas sector has lost more than 20,000 jobs since 2015. CCS, they argue, could absorb much of that displaced workforce, especially in areas like welding, operations, and maintenance.
There are currently over 20 bills filed which would’ve greatly limited the technology. Some of them function to give landowners and local communities more power in refusing carbon capture, others impose heavy regulations on the technology itself.
Much of the testimony from witnesses expressed concerns on the use of eminent domain, which several bills aimed to address.
“You have to give it back to people and let them have the right to vote,” said Renne Savant, representing the Louisiana CO2 Alliance.
Savant took issue with former Sen. Sharon Hewitt’s 2020 law which extended eminent domain authority to include pipelines transporting CO2 to storage facilities.
“She said ‘we’re going to take it out of the air, and put it in existing pipelines and sequester it. Never did she mention the hundreds of miles of new pipelines’,” Savant said. “Never did she mention the millions of toxic CO2 byproducts that will be put underground, never mentioned anything about property rights.”
Savant was one of many whose testimony was less than friendly to the burgeoning technology.
Chris Alexander, a Baton Rouge attorney, called CCS “a complete racket that is being paid for with our money and being imposed on citizens throughout this state, whether or not they want it or not, and that, quite frankly, is a disgrace”
Roland Hollins, an Allen Parish Police Jury member, said that parishes are “being forced to take this poison that we don’t want.”
“I’m not saying I’m for or against [CCS],” Hollins said in an interview with The Center Square. “But our people ought to be the ones who make that decision. Not Baton Rouge, not industry. Right now, the industry has a pistol in their pocket with eminent domain.”
Rep. Shane Mack, R-Livingston, introduceda billto strengthen safety and environmental protections for carbon dioxide storage and pipeline projects. Schamerhorn introduceda billthat would allow victims of CO2 leaks to claim money for damages.
Opponents argued that Schamerhorn’s bill would drive CO2 investment out of Louisiana by creating legal risks companies wouldn’t accept and that Mack’s bill was superfluous and because the bill imposed broad, open-ended financial liabilities and regulatory obligations on carbon storage operators.
“The benefits do not outweigh the costs,” Schamerhorn said.
Note: The following A.I. based commentary is not part of the original article, reproduced above, but is offered in the hopes that it will promote greater media literacy and critical thinking, by making any potential bias more visible to the reader –Staff Editor.
Note: The following A.I. based commentary is not part of the original article, reproduced above, but is offered in the hopes that it will promote greater media literacy and critical thinking, by making any potential bias more visible to the reader –Staff Editor.
Political Bias Rating: Centrist
The article provides a factual account of a legislative process related to carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) in Louisiana, with no clear ideological stance or promotion of a specific viewpoint. It reports on both the support and opposition surrounding CCS, detailing the perspectives of industry leaders, local chambers of commerce, and individuals concerned about the environmental and economic impacts. The tone is neutral, presenting the views of various parties, including proponents who see CCS as beneficial for economic growth and job creation, as well as critics who are concerned about property rights and safety. The article does not advocate for one side, ensuring a balanced portrayal of the issue.
SUMMARY: As summer approaches, swim safety is essential for families spending time near water. Rowdy Gaines, a three-time Olympic gold medalist, emphasizes the importance of swim lessons, which reduce drowning risks by 88%, especially for children aged 1 to 4, the highest risk group. He advises parents never to take their eyes off children near water, always keeping them within arm’s reach, and learning CPR. Safety measures like pool barriers are vital. Swim lessons can start as early as a child’s walking age, tailored individually. Resources like stepintoswim.org offer lesson locators and safety tips to ensure a safe, joyful swim season for all.
Tensions rose at the Louisiana State Capitol as a legislative package to reduce auto insurance costs neared final approval. Six controversial “tort reform” bills passed the Senate, mostly on party lines, with Republican support and Democratic opposition. These bills limit plaintiffs’ recovery in auto injury lawsuits, aiming to curb inflated medical claims and litigation. One key bill restricts compensation to actual medical payments rather than billed charges. Democrats argued these reforms won’t lower rates and would hurt injured parties. Another bipartisan bill would increase transparency in insurance rate changes. The package now advances to the House and requires Gov. Jeff Landry’s approval.
Louisiana auto insurance debate overheats as legislation nears finish line
Tensions are escalating at the State Capitol as a legislative package that attempts to lower auto insurance costs in Louisiana nears its final stage of approval.
On Wednesday, the Senate advanced six of the more controversial insurance measures in a floor session that lasted late into the night. The debate included impassioned floor speeches and a heated clash between two lawmakers, both attorneys who stand on opposite sides of the issue.
Gov. Jeff Landry has signaled support for the proposals.
Only one of the bills cleared the chamber with bipartisan support, while the other five passed mostly along party lines with Republicans voting in favor of them and Democrats against. Those five are so-called “tort reform” proposals that give insurance companies certain protections or advantages in litigation, making it harder for accident victims to file successful lawsuits.
Tort reform legislation from previous years has failed to reduce auto insurance rates, though most Republicans, including state Insurance Commissioner Tim Temple, have said those measures were not strong enough.
This lack of results was among the points of contention during Wednesday’s debate on Senate Bill 231, which took up most of the evening before the bill passed in a 27-8 vote. Sponsored by Sen. Mike Reese, R-Leesville, it would effectively reduce the money plaintiffs can recover for medical expenses in an auto accident lawsuit. The amount would be limited to what a plaintiff actually pays for care rather than what doctors and hospitals bill.
Supporters of Reese’s bill argue it would provide medical billing transparency in personal injury lawsuits and prevent plaintiffs’ attorneys from basing claims on artificially inflated medical bills no one actually pays.
Opponents argue transparency should apply to both sides. They pointed to a separate tort reform law that allows insurers to hide certain details related to their policyholder’s coverage during a trial. Jurors could lower a monetary award if they believe an individual defendant — rather than an insurance company — will be personally on the hook for paying it, according to their viewpoint.
“Current law allows the plaintiff to lie to the jury, and it does not allow the defendant to tell the truth,” Sen. Alan Seabaugh, R-Shreveport, an attorney whose practice includes insurance defense, said in support of the measure.
State Sen. Jay Luneau in the Louisiana Senate chambers on June 8, 2023. (Photo credit: Wes Muller/LAI)
Sen. Jay Luneau, D-Alexandria, took issue over what he called Seabaugh’s “ambush-type” strategy to tack on a late-hour amendment to Reese’s bill that other senators had no time to review.
Luneau, a personal injury lawyer, said the amended bill was being rushed because Seabaugh had a conflicting court date Tuesday, when the Senate convenes next after a long Memorial Day holiday.
Standing at the Senate floor lectern within a foot of each other, Luneau and Seabaugh got into an exchange that quickly grew intense.
Seabaugh said the amendment, which was eventually adopted, requires judges and juries to be shown both the amount paid and the amount billed for medical expenses in auto injury cases, but confusion ensued over its text. The Republican senator, defending his amendment, said that Luneau, himself, had requested the provision.
When Luneau denied this and offered to withdraw the purported request, Seabaugh, in a raised voice, accused Luneau of lying.
“You were pounding the table, saying ‘Let’s tell the jury everything. Let’s let them see the billed amount,’” Seabaugh said, pausing but drawing no response from Luneau. “You are just gonna come up here and blatantly bald-faced lie, and I’m not surprised.”
The accusation drew quick intervention from Senate President Cameron Henry, R-Metairie, and prompted Senate Sergeant-at-Arms Louis Carral Jr. to swiftly approach the lectern, prepared to physically separate the two men.
“Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa! Guys, guys, come on!” Henry told the two senators. “There’s a certain amount of decorum that we expect to have in the Senate. Y’all need to relax.”
The amendment actually would have allowed defendants to try to lower jury awards following a trial
Later, Luneau delivered a lengthy speech against the bill, so long that he appeared to be mounting a filibuster to delay a vote. But he ultimately ceded the floor after detailing his comprehensive argument against tort reform.
Luneau cited data from the Louisiana Department of Insurance that shows there are more than 100 auto insurance companies in Louisiana, countering arguments that more insurers are needed in the state to create competition. Overall, they received $5.9 billion in premiums and paid out $3.4 billion in claims and losses, the date shows.
The five largest auto insurers in the state — State Farm, Progressive, Geico, Allstate and GoAuto — control 70% of the market, according to state data Luneau shared.
“This is a bad bill,” Luneau said. “It’s going to take money away from people who are legitimately injured, and it’s not going to reduce automobile insurance rates. And we’ll be right back here again with people screaming about the next round of tort reform we need to do.”
Reese’s bill next heads to the House for consideration.
Rate history disclosure
Only one of the five proposals, House Bill 148, sponsored by Rep. Jeff Wiley, R-Maurepas, received bipartisan support. Republicans counted for all of the no votes in the 26-9 outcome.
Wiley’s proposal would require homeowner and auto insurance companies to show customers what they paid previously for coverage when sending out renewal notices. It would let customers see whether their rates have changed before they decide to extend their policy.
The bill would also give the state insurance commissioner power to strike down any insurance rate increase considered “excessive” or unreasonably high. Temple has lobbied against this provision, arguing it would force him to choose between rates based on real market conditions and the perception that he’s lowering rates to improve his reelection chances.
Senate Republicans weakened the provision Wednesday when they inserted language into Wiley’s bill that could let Temple approve excessively high rates as long as an insurer shows that they weren’t chosen arbitrarily or randomly.
Another amendment to Wiley’s bill allows the public to review documents insurance companies file with the state when seeking a rate increase, but only if the insurance commissioner determines the information shouldn’t be kept confidential as a proprietary trade secret.
The measure will return to the House for a final vote on amendments before heading to the governor’s desk.
Other insurance legislation the Senate approved included:
House Bill 450, by Rep. Michael Melerine, R-Shreveport, would end the Housley presumption, a standard of evidence explained in a 1991 Louisiana Supreme Court ruling that applies to auto accidents, medical malpractice and other injury lawsuits. In a nutshell, the Housley presumption says courts should assume a plaintiff’s injuries resulted from the accident in question if they were in good health beforehand.
The bill received final approval in a 28-9 vote and awaits Gov. Landry’s signature.
House Bill 434, sponsored by Rep. Jason DeWitt, R-Alexandria, would limit bodily injury claims by plaintiffs who did not carry auto insurance at the time of the accident. It would forbid them from recovering as much as $100,000 worth of damages.
The bill received final approval in a 28-9 vote and has been sent to the governor.
House Bill 431, sponsored by Rep. Emily Chenevert, R-Baton Rouge, would change Louisiana’s comparative fault statute, which assigns a percentage of blame to each party in an accident and allows for the recovery of damages in proportion with those percentages.
Proponents argue comparative fault allows someone to recover damages for injuries sustained in accidents for which they are mostly at fault. Opponents say it is the fairest way to assign liability.
Under current law, if a court finds one party in a lawsuit is 60% at fault for an accident and the other party is 40% at fault, they would each be liable for their respective share of the damages and could file claims against each other for the remaining amounts. Under Chenevert’s bill, anyone who is 51% or more at fault for an accident would get nothing.
The bill passed in a 28-9 vote and will return to the House for changes made in the Senate.
House Bill 436, by Rep. Gabe Firment, R-Pollock, would prohibit “unauthorized aliens” — defined in the measure as individuals illegally in the United States under federal immigration law — who are injured in car accidents from receiving compensation for pain, suffering and lost income. The proposal would still allow recovery for property damages and medical expenses. Auto insurance companies could still sell policies to unauthorized immigrants.
It cleared the chamber in a 27-10 vote and will return to the House for a vote on Senate amendments.
GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.
SUBSCRIBE
Louisiana Illuminator is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Louisiana Illuminator maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Greg LaRose for questions: info@lailluminator.com.
Note: The following A.I. based commentary is not part of the original article, reproduced above, but is offered in the hopes that it will promote greater media literacy and critical thinking, by making any potential bias more visible to the reader –Staff Editor.
Political Bias Rating: Center-Right
This article presents a detailed account of the Louisiana legislative process regarding auto insurance tort reform, highlighting the Republican-backed bills that favor insurance companies by limiting plaintiffs’ recoveries. The framing largely reflects a conservative, pro-business perspective through emphasis on tort reform and insurance industry interests, supported by Republican lawmakers and Gov. Jeff Landry. However, it also fairly presents Democratic opposition and arguments against the bills, including concerns about limiting injured plaintiffs’ rights and the ineffectiveness of prior reforms. The balanced presentation of both sides suggests reporting that leans moderately toward conservative viewpoints without ignoring opposing perspectives.
www.thecentersquare.com – By Nolan McKendry | The Center Square – (The Center Square – ) 2025-05-22 14:59:00
The Louisiana Senate Committee on Finance reviewed the proposed $45 billion budget for fiscal year 2026, focusing on education, health, human services, and infrastructure. Advocates for disabilities, addiction recovery, domestic violence survivors, and low-income students urged increased funding for social safety nets. Easter Seals Louisiana requested $465,000 for support services, and People First of Louisiana sought restoration of a $110,000 funding cut. Addiction treatment advocates called for sustained investment, warning of Medicaid rate cuts without it. The Louisiana Association for the Blind requested $11 million, promising a $35 million return. Domestic violence services requested an additional $3 million for shelters. The Pelican Institute advocated for full funding of the GATOR scholarship program.
(The Center Square) − The Louisiana Senate Committee on Finance took testimony Thursday on the state’s proposed $45 billion operating budget for the 2026 fiscal year, hearing directly from advocates for individuals with disabilities, those battling addiction, survivors of domestic violence, and low-income students.
The budget, which includes constitutionally mandated funding for K-12 education, also outlines major appropriations for health, human services, and infrastructure. As lawmakers begin parsing through the spending plan, nonprofit and community leaders are pressing for renewed or increased investments in social safety net programs.
Tracy Garner, president and CEO of Easter Seals Louisiana, a nonprofit providing support to people with disabilities, urged the committee to approve $465,000 in state funding through House Bill 1. The money would go toward support coordination services — a vital link between individuals and the care they need.
Other organizations made similar appeals. Jamie Duplechine, chapter coordinator for People First of Louisiana, asked the committee to restore $110,000 in funding that had been cut from the group, which advocates for individuals with developmental disabilities.
Several people with disabilities testified in support of the organization’s work. Charles Romera also voiced gratitude for a previous $250,000 allocation to the Louisiana Developmental Disabilities Council, but noted the funds have yet to be reallocated in the current proposal.
Several advocates and protestors rallied in support of disability services funding.
The behavioral health and addiction treatment community also turned out in force.
Lonnie Granier, policy and advocacy manager at Odyssey House Louisiana−one of the state’s largest behavioral health nonprofits−thanked lawmakers for an additional $10 million in the State General Fund for substance use disorder treatment.
Granier warned, however, that without sustained investment, “addiction Medicaid rates will be cut” once temporary funding enhancements expire. Granier called on legislators to support $31 million in total for substance use disorder Medicaid treatment rates.
Scottie Thompson, a peer support specialist at Serenity Treatment Center, also testified, requesting recurring funds for addiction services, though did not specify an amount.
Brian Patchett, president and CEO of the Louisiana Association for the Blind, requested an additional $11 million in funding, calling it “an investment that would yield $35 million” in return.
Domestic violence services were also the subject of advocacy.
Mariah Wisneski, executive director of the Louisiana Coalition Against Domestic Violence, noted the Legislature has allocated $7 million in state funds for victim services in the current budget.
She requested an additional $3 million, citing tangible results from past funding: over 200 new shelter beds and 11 outreach offices, many in rural areas.
“Investments from the last two years have been incredibly successful,” Wisneski told the committee.
Also appearing before the panel was Laurie Adams with the Pelican Institute for Public Policy, who asked lawmakers to prioritize full funding for the Louisiana GATOR scholarship program to ensure that all eligible applications are supported.
Note: The following A.I. based commentary is not part of the original article, reproduced above, but is offered in the hopes that it will promote greater media literacy and critical thinking, by making any potential bias more visible to the reader –Staff Editor.
Political Bias Rating: Centrist
The article provides a straightforward account of testimony before the Louisiana Senate Committee on Finance regarding the proposed state budget. It reports on the appeals and requests made by various advocacy groups—such as those supporting individuals with disabilities, addiction treatment services, and domestic violence survivors—without endorsing or critiquing their positions. The tone is neutral and factual, offering balanced coverage of the budget’s components and the perspectives of multiple stakeholders. There is no language or framing that indicates an ideological stance or bias; instead, the piece focuses on presenting relevant information about policy discussions and funding priorities in an impartial manner.
