Louisiana House Bill HB35

Louisiana 2012 Regular Session

• Introduced: 3/12/12
• Refer: 3/12/12

Caption

Appropriates funds for payment of judgment against the Dept. of Transportation and Development in the matter of "Tommy Thompson and Michelle Thompson v. State of Louisiana, et al"

Impact

The impact of HB35 is primarily financial, as it ensures the state complies with a legal judgment that could otherwise result in further legal complications or financial penalties. By appropriating funds for this purpose, the bill fosters a sense of accountability within state departments, particularly in adhering to judicial decisions. Consequently, this bill reinforces the importance of the rule of law and the necessity for state agencies to honor their commitments, including financial ones.

Summary

House Bill 35 proposes an appropriation from the General Fund of Louisiana for the Fiscal Year 2012-2013, specifically to pay a consent judgment in the case of 'Tommy Thompson and Michelle Thompson v. State of Louisiana, et al'. The bill allocates a total of $16,000 to settle the judgment against the Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development. The implications of this bill are straightforward, as it deals directly with funding mandated by a court ruling, thus underscoring the legal and financial responsibilities of state agencies.

Sentiment

The sentiment surrounding HB35 is largely administrative and functional, reflecting a recognition of the necessity to fulfill legal obligations. There appears to be minimal contention around the bill, as it does not introduce new policy measures or controversial issues. Rather, it aims to rectify a specific financial obligation stemming from a legal ruling that has already been made, suggesting bipartisan support for the bill's passage.

Contention

While the bill itself has faced little opposition due to its nature as a necessary funding measure to comply with a court ruling, it does highlight broader discussions surrounding state spending and funding priorities. The allocation of funds to pay a judicially mandated judgment does raise questions regarding the budgetary constraints faced by the Department of Transportation and Development, as well as future appropriations. However, without substantial debate or amendment proposals presented during the discussions, HB35 stands as a straightforward measure to settle an identified financial need.