Tag: bribery

M2Q Corruption Index: Analysis of Jefferson Parish 2025 Candidates

What is the M2Q Corruption Perception Score? The Motion to Quash (M2Q) Corruption Score is an index of multiple sources. These sources are combined to produce an overall score.*

Source data

The goal is to capture expert assessments of various public sector corruption practices. This includes bribery and misuse of public funds. It also involves abuse of public office for personal gain, nepotism in civil service, and state capture. 

M2Q has taken into account 3 different assessments from 22 political candidates in Jefferson Parish. Half are unopposed.

 Corruption Perception Overview

The average corruption perception score for Jefferson Parish candidates is C (71%). Fourteen candidates scored A.Two scored D, four scored F. One scored B and one scored C. 

The M2Q corruption perception score is a powerful representation of the stand against corruption in Jefferson Parish. It serves as a reminder of the importance of transparency and honesty in our political system. The scorecards offer precise and reliable judgment of campaign finance abuse. They give sound judgment particularly for those interested in elections and the stand against corruption.

*Includes contributions from gaming interests, pharmaceuticals, conflicts, or any entity that has received federal money in the form of contracts, grants, loans, or other financial assistance. Candidates are not penalized for funding their own campaigns.

Candidate Scorecard**

Click the name to view the folder for each candidate

*Campaign finance reports were obtained from the Louisiana Ethics Board website. Federal Award profiles were found at 

Jefferson Parish 2025
Candidate AverageC71%
Timothy Kerner JrF53%
Andrea ManuelA100%
Ricky TempletD60%
Belinda ConstantF47%
Robert E. Billiot SrC70%
Brett LawsonF53%
Dwayne MunchF53%
Wayne RauA100%
Rudy SmithA93%
Maggie CampbellA100%
Jason LeBlancA100%
Johnny ShaddingerA93%
Mike HinyubD67%
Tim MatherneA100%
Johnny Nobles JrA93%
Mark MillerB87%
Lisa ValenceA100%
Bobby BlackA100%
Randy CarrA93%
Bobby UtleyA93%
Bobby BonvillianA100%
Larry WarinoA97%

Pandemic Oversight

The U.S. Government continues to pursue a quiet but active campaign against Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) recipients believed to have committed fraud. The government is expected to continue to pursue criminal charges, with a focus on civil False Claims Act cases.

How is corruption perception measured? 

The index is published before elections by Motion to Quash since 2019. It ranks candidates on a scale from 100 (very clean) to 0 (highly corrupt). For consistency, the total scores were based on these three principles:

  1. Campaign contributions issued (5 points)
  2. Campaign contributions received (5 points)
  3. Disclosures/conflicts of interest (5 points)

Only when candidates scored 15 for the whole package did they score 100 percent. 

Campaigns are dynamic. We welcome your feedback. If you see a candidate’s position has changed, send us an email to info@motiontoquash.org with the new information.

Recognized by the National Whistleblower Center, Tracie Burke is Louisiana author of Motion to Quash. She can be reached at tracie@motiontoquash.org. Motion to Quash LLC  successfully promoted legislation that supports the Anti-Money Laundering Act of 2020 and amendments to the Whistleblower Protection Act. Please Support journalism in the public interest by contributing today. Click here to donate Motion to Quash ISSN 2644-1594 is the copyrighted property of Motion to Quash LLC . 

Ethics Scores 24th JDC Election 2024

Scientific research shows that campaign contributions are correlated with judges’ decisions. There is a crisis with the court’s legitimacy in Louisiana. This issue is very salient now for a variety of reasons. There are political concerns, case-related concerns, and financial concerns. 

Damon Cann, a Political Science instructor at Georgia University, conducted a study. It explores whether judges favor attorneys who support their campaigns financially. He shows that campaign contributions are indeed correlated with judges’ decisions. (Cann, Damon M. “Justice for Sale? Campaign Contributions and Judicial Decisionmaking.” State Politics & Policy Quarterly, vol. 7, no. 3, 2007, pp. 281–97. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/40405604. Accessed 29 Feb. 2024)

Judicial ethics in Louisiana is a pretty hot topic for Motion to Quash LLC. There is discussion about judges taking advantage of elections to promote their own interests. There is discussion about judges showing favor with attorneys who donate to their campaigns. There is discussion about making it illegal for judges to accept contributions from attorneys who practice in their district. Join the Campaign for Judicial Integrity in Louisiana here.

The Code of Judicial Conduct highlights a crucial principle. Judges should avoid the appearance of impropriety. 28 USC section 455 – enacted by Congress, binds them and sets the standard for all the courts.

None of the three candidates for 24th JDC follow the judicial guidelines. They do not adhere when it comes to providing financial support to their campaigns. Jefferson Parish has been out of step with the norms governing Louisiana since Operation Wrinkled Robe. The operation, championed by Jim Letten, proved campaign support in Jefferson Parish was given with criminal intent. It was not for political reasons.

Ethics Scores for 24th JDC Candidates for 3/23/2024 Election

24th JDC
Candidate averageF33%
Jackie MaloneyF33%
Jerry SmithF33%
Lindsey ValentiD67%

Jackie Maloney- Ethics score F (33%) 

As a judicial candidate Jackie Maloney received $29,400 campaign contributions from 44 attorneys who practice in her district. Ms. Maloney received $2500 from 5 attorneys and $1,000 from 5 attorneys. $500 was issued by 14 attorneys. 

Jackie Maloney is an attorney. She issued over five thousand dollars in campaign contributions to 7 Judges in her district of practice. 

Jerry Smith Ethics score F (33%)

Since 2020, Jerry Smith received over $115,000 from over 180 attorneys who practice in his district. Mr. Smith received $2500 from 13 attorneys and $1,000 from 21 attorneys. $500 was issued by 50 attorneys. 

Since 2019, Jerry Smith issued $3650 to 10 judges in the 24th JDC.

Lindsey Valenti Ethics score D (67%)

As a candidate, Lindsey Valenti received more than $150, 000 from over 130 attorneys who practice in her district. Ms. Valenti received $2,500 from 36 attorneys and $1,000 from 22 attorneys. $500 was received by 42 attorneys.

As an attorney, Lindsey Valenti issued zero dollars to Judges. Thus, earning her a higher score despite receiving the most money.

Method

For consistency, the total scores were based on these three principles:

  1. Campaign contributions issued (5 possible points)
  2. Campaign contributions received (5 possible points)
  3. Disclosures/conflicts of interest (5 possible points)

Only when candidates scored 15 for the whole package did they score 100 percent. Campaigns are dynamic. We welcome your feedback. If you see a candidate’s position has changed, send us an email to tracie@motiontoquash.org with the new information. The spreadsheets are free and printable. Campaign finance reports were obtained from the Ethics Board’s website and the Ethics Disclosures can be found on the Louisiana Supreme Court’s website. 

Recognized by the National Whistleblower Center (NWC), Tracie Burke is Louisiana author of motiontoquash.org.  Motion to Quash LLC successfully promoted legislation that supports the Anti-Money Laundering Act of 2020 and amendments to the Whistleblower Protection Act. Please Support journalism in the public interest. Click here to donate Motion to Quash ISSN 2644-1594 is the copyrighted property of Motion to Quash LLC 2019.  NWC’s mission is to support whistleblowers in their efforts to expose and help prosecute corruption and other wrongdoing around the world.