Louisiana House Bill HR88

Louisiana 2012 Regular Session

• Introduced: 5/8/12
• Refer: 5/9/12

Caption

Requests the attorney general to investigate the validity of mineral lease contracts with the Win or Lose Corporation (OR INCREASE GF EX See Note)

Impact

The resolution, if acted upon, could have significant implications for state laws concerning the validity of long-standing mineral lease agreements. By investigating these contracts, the Attorney General may unearth legal deficiencies that could lead to the re-evaluation or nullification of prior agreements. This investigation could thus influence future dealings between the state and private corporations regarding resource extraction and public trust in governmental oversight of such arrangements. Additionally, it emphasizes the importance of accountability and transparency in government contracts, particularly those involving public officials and their businesses.

Summary

House Resolution 88 (HR88) requests the Louisiana Attorney General to investigate the validity of mineral lease contracts associated with the Win or Lose Corporation. The resolution highlights the necessity of this inquiry in light of potential irregularities in the execution and assignment of these contracts, which date back to the early 1930s. Public scrutiny, fueled by media reports and the current fiscal condition of the state, has raised concerns about the legality and enforceability of these agreements. The resolution outlines specific inquiries regarding the validity of the contracts at the time of execution, their current status, and whether the state can recover any royalties and profits disbursed under these contracts.

Sentiment

Sentiment towards HR88 appears to be grounded in a call for accountability and due diligence regarding natural resource management in the state. Supporters of the resolution likely view it as a proactive measure to safeguard state interests and ensure that any financial benefits derived from public resources are properly accounted for. However, there may be concerns regarding the implications of such investigations on existing business relationships and the potential for legal challenges, which could create a mixed public perception of the initiative.

Contention

Notable points of contention regarding HR88 may surface around the implications of public scrutiny on private contracts and the extent to which governmental oversight should extend into long-ago executed agreements. Critics could argue that re-evaluating contracts established decades ago may create uncertainty and deter future investment in state resources. Conversely, proponents may stress the need to address any corruption or mismanagement linked to such contracts to uphold public trust and ensure fair dealings in the state's mineral leasing processes.