Cleo Fields Corruption Perception Index F (33%)

Cleo Fields Corruption decorative image

Cleo Fields’ Corruption Perception Index (CPI) is F (33%). It details him as highly corrupt based on current and past issues. For example, ethics fines, False Claims Act scrutiny, and allegations of insider trading are a few. Also, his gerrymandering effort benefited his 2024 congressional bid. Further, a historical 1997 FBI video of him accepting $20,000 cash from former Governor Edwin Edwards, is a suspected bribe. He also faced a State Supreme Court bar from running for reelection in 2007. 

CPI for Democratic Candidates Overview

Basically, this overview highlights where the Louisiana Democratic party is lacking by exposing networks that allow corruption. The average CPI score is a B (85%). While 14 candidates have scored A for their corruption levels, 4 candidates in leadership positions failed. They have stayed stagnant or got worse. One candidate scored a B.

Democrat candidates U.S. Senate, U.S. House 2026Corruption Score is based on three data sources. 5 total points possible for each one.
Data SourceMoney IssuedMoney ReceivedDisclosures or conflicts
5 total points possible for each one555
Total (cumulative):15
Candidate AverageB85%5.03.84.0
Nick AlbaresA100%555
Gary CrockettA100%555
Jamie DavisF56%51.42
Lauren JewettF56%51.42
Jim LongA100%555
Troy Carter SrF53%503
Renada CollinsA97%4.854.8
John DayB80%552
Tia LeBrunA100%555
Caleb WalkerA93%554
Conrad CableA100%555
Matt GromlichA100%555
Jessee FleenorA100%555
Larry FoyA100%555
Lindsay GarciaA100%555
Dan McKayA100%555
Tania NymanA100%555
Cleo FieldsF33%500

Cleo Fields Corruption Perception Index

Ethics Disclosures and Campaign Finance- Issues found

Ethics Fines

Recently, the Louisiana Ethics Board denied Cleo Fields’ appeal to waive fines related to missing campaign finance reporting deadlines. These fines stemmed from a 2019, 1997, and 1999 reports for his state senate campaigns.

Active Account: As of late 2023, the account in question still had $3,470 in remaining contributions. It also had over $300,000 in outstanding loans. 

Fields, CleoLOUISIANA BOARD OF ETHICSCampaign finance fine12/15/2025$2,510.00

Pandemic Oversight

The Fields Law Firm– No issues found

PPP Loans- Cleo Fields is being scrutinized for accepting donations from businesses that received taxpayer backed PPP disaster assistance. This raises concerns about the legitimacy of the need for the loan.

False Claims Act

The investigation into loan fraud among disaster recovery recipients and Louisiana politicians highlights concerns about the legitimacy of taxpayer-funded assistance. Over 100 businesses donated politically after receiving nearly $200 million in federal funds. Calls for accountability include repayments from recipients who misused funds. Government scrutiny of fraudulent PPP loans persists.

Organizational Conflicts of Interest (OCI)

Receiving donations from a federal award recipient is generally not a direct legal conflict of interest for a Congressman. This applies as long as the funds are legal campaign contributions and not direct bribes. Still, it raises significant ethical concerns about the appearance of influence. If the donation is funded by the grant itself, it is prohibited lobbying.

For instance, in November of 2023, Cleo Fields accepted donations from Ray Jโ€™s College of Hair. Since then, from 2024-2026, the Department of Education issued over $570,000 in taxpayer funded federal awards to the college.

Fields, CleoRAY J’S COLLEGE OF HAIR, LLC11/21/2023$2,500.00

Join the Campaign for Judicial Integrity in Louisiana

Cleo Fields issued at least $10,000 to judicial campaigns. 

Marcelle, C. DeniseCLEO FIELDS CAMPAIGN FUND7/25/2019$250.00
Marcelle, C. DeniseCLEO FIELDS12/7/2018$500.00
Marcelle, C. DeniseCLEO FIELDS CAMPAIGN FUND10/20/2020$5,000.00
Fields, WilsonCLEO FIELDS6/23/2010$2,500.00
Fields, WilsonCLEO FIELDS1/25/2025$2,500.00

Insider Trading

Several media outlets have reported on the insider trading allegations involving Cleo Fieldsโ€™s conveniently-timed stock trades.

News website NOTUS reported that Cleo Fields purchased nearly $300k of Oracle stock. This occurred in the days leading up to the public announcement of Oracleโ€™s acquisition of Tik Tok. Fieldsโ€™s membership on the House Committee on Financial Services has raised further red flags. Thus, leading some to believe that Fields violated Congressional โ€œinsider tradingโ€ laws (i.e. purchasing a companyโ€™s stock based on non-public information).

US Congressmen are prohibited from engaging in โ€œinsider tradingโ€ under the STOCK Act (2012).

Gerrymandering

Cleo Fields colluded with Republican Governor Jeff Landry in 2024 to create a gerrymandered US Congressional map that benefited Fields. One day after Landry signed the new law, Fields announced his bid for the 6th US Congressional district for 2024.

Background

In 1997, the FBI released video footage of Democratic congressman, Cleo Fields accepting $20k cash from former Governor Edwin Edwards. In the FBI tape, Governor Edwards talked about a deal for a casino license.

Edwards said, โ€œYou need to make sure that everyone involved is careful about how thatโ€™s passed out.โ€ Fields had just run unsuccessfully for governor and said he had a $180,000 campaign debt.โ€

Further, the State Supreme Court barred Fields from running for reelection in 2007. This was due to questions about his official residency during his 2019 run for the State Senate.

How is the CPI measured? 

The CPI index 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, so we welcome your feedback. If you see a candidateโ€™s position has changed, send us an email to info@motiontoquash.org with the new information.

Recognized by the NWC, Tracie Burke is author of Motion to Quash. M2Q supports the Whistleblower Protection Act. If you would like to 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 .

internal link
external link
Dr. Frederick Graves d/b/a Jurisdictionary authorized this ad.
external link

$500 can get you two banners for an entire month. This includes ads across the M2Q website using both branding and call-to-action. Click here to buy ads or use the QR code. Thank you!

CPI for Democratic Candidates U.S. Senate, U.S. House

This CPI scores the Louisiana Democratic candidates in the 2026 U.S. Senate and House elections. It highlights a decline in Democratic leadership’s commitment to tackling corruption in Louisiana. The overview notes that while 14 candidates scored an A, four candidates in Louisiana Democratic leadership positions failed the corruption test.

internal link

This corruption perception index (CPI) focuses on the Louisiana Democratic candidates for U.S. Senate and U.S. House of Representatives for the 2026 elections. M2Q (Motion to Quash LLC) uses the CPI to measure how corrupt candidates are perceived to be, according to experts. Presently, the CPI is the most widely used corruption ranking in the world.

According to the CPI, we’re seeing a decline in Louisiana Democratic leadership to tackle corruption. Specifically, some DPEC leaders persistently try to prevent journalists and whistleblowers from challenging abuses of power. Thus, reducing transparency and accountability. Standing against corruption in Louisiana is hard to achieve, but we won’t give up- and you shouldn’t either!

CPI for Democratic Candidates Overview

This overview highlights where the Louisiana Democratic party is lacking by exposing networks that allow corruption. The average CPI score is a B (85%). While 14 candidates have scored A for their corruption levels, 4 candidates in leadership positions failed. They have stayed stagnant or got worse. One candidate scored a B.

CPI for Democratic candidates decorative image
Democrat candidates U.S. Senate, U.S. House 2026
Corruption Score is based on three data sources.
5 total points possible for each one.
Data SourceMoney IssuedMoney ReceivedDisclosures/ conflicts
5 total points possible for each one555
Total (cumulative):15
Candidate AverageB85%5.03.84.0
Nick AlbaresA100%555
Gary CrockettA100%555
Jamie DavisF56%51.42
Lauren JewettF56%51.42
Jim LongA100%555
Troy Carter SrF53%503
Renada CollinsA97%4.854.8
John DayB80%552
Tia LeBrunA100%555
Caleb WalkerA93%554
Conrad CableA100%555
Matt GromlichA100%555
Jessee FleenorA100%555
Larry FoyA100%555
Lindsay GarciaA100%555
Dan McKayA100%555
Tania NymanA100%555
Cleo FieldsF33%500

M2Q offers data driven insights on corruption. In particular, we work toward systematic change in anti-corruption. We generally focus on issues with the greatest impact on Louisiana citizens. Additionally, we hold the powerful to account for the common good and build coalitions to change the status quo.

How is the CPI measured? 

The CPI index 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, so we welcome your feedback. If you see a candidateโ€™s position has changed, send us an email to info@motiontoquash.org with the new information.

Recognized by the NWC, Tracie Burke is author of Motion to Quash. M2Q supports the Whistleblower Protection Act. If you would like to 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 .

โ† Back

Thank you for your response. โœจ

external link
Dr. Frederick Graves d/b/a Jurisdictionary authorized this ad.

$500 can get you two banners for an entire month. This includes ads across the M2Q website using both branding and call-to-action. Click here to buy ads or use the QR code. Thank you!

Troy Carter Corruption Perception Score F (53%)

Troy Carter Corruption Perception Score decorative image

Troy Carter Sr. earned an F (53%) Corruption Perception Score based on the M2Q (Motion to Quash) index. Each election, M2Q assesses public sector corruption practices like bribery, misuse of public funds, and abuse of office. The scorecard highlights several issues, including ethics fines, a donation to the One Community Foundation, and donations from gaming. It also highlights donations from the pharmaceutical industry. Additionally, Carter received donations from businesses that received PPP loans, raising concerns about ties to loan fraud and political contributions.

decorative image
Democrat
candidates
U.S. Senate,
U.S. House 2026

5 total points possible for each one
Data SourceIssuedReceivedDisclosures
conflicts
5 total points
possible
for each
555
Candidate
Average
B85%5.03.84.0
Nick
Albares
A100%555
Gary
Crockett
A100%555
Jamie
Davis
F56%51.42
Lauren
Jewett
F56%51.42
Jim
Long
A100%555
Troy
Carter
F53%503
Renada
Collins
A97%4.854.8
John
Day
B80%552
Tia
LeBrun
A100%555
Caleb
Walker
A93%554
Conrad
Cable
A100%555
Matt
Gromlich
A100%555
Jessee
Fleenor
A100%555
Larry
Foy
A100%555
Lindsay
Garcia
A100%555
Dan
McKay
A100%555
Tania
Nyman
A100%555
Cleo
Fields
F33%500

Troy Carter Corruption Perception

Ethics Fines

In 2019 and 2021, Troy Carter paid $6,500 to the state for docket proceedings and for Ethics fines.

Carter, Troy AnthonyLOUISIANA STATE TREASURERCampaign Report Late Fees3/25/2021$4,000.00
Carter, Troy AnthonyTREASURY OF THE STATE OF LOUISIANADocket Proceeding7/25/2019$2,500.00

Organizational Conflicts of Interest (OCI)

One Community Foundation- Active

Troy Carterโ€™s campaign donated $2,000 to the organization, solely owned by Carter. Additionally, no Form 990N was found for One Community Foundation. This requires due diligence. 

One Community Foundation has received 2 grants from 2 grantmakers totaling $9,100 according to the most recent available data.

Carter, Troy AnthonyONE COMMUNITY FOUNDATION11/21/2017$2,000.00

Troy Carter Corruption Perception

Gaming

Troy Carter received at least $6,500 from the gaming industry. M2Q considers it unethical for politicians to accept money from the gambling industry. This is primarily due to concerns over conflicts of interest, the influence of special interests on public policy, and addiction. In essence, these donations often act as “legalized bribery,” where corporations buy influence to shape regulation.

SourceDateAmount
METRO GAMING & AMUSEMENT COMPANY2/16/2016$500.00
REDMAN GAMING OF LOUISIANA, LLC2/22/2016$1,000.00
METRO GAMING & AMUSEMENT COMPANY3/6/2018$500.00
ADVANCED GAMING DISTRIBUTORS, LLC3/2/2020$1,000.00
METRO GAMING & AMUSEMENT COMPANY3/3/2020$1,000.00
POWER GAMING, LLC2/26/2020$500.00
CHALMETTE AMUSEMENT CO. INC.3/3/2020$1,000.00
RIVERBEND TRUCKSTOP & PALACE CASINOS, INC2/22/2016$1,000.00

Pandemic Oversight

Basically, investigations into loan fraud among disaster recovery recipients and Louisiana politicians highlights concerns about the legitimacy of taxpayer-funded assistance. Specifically, over 100 businesses donated politically after receiving nearly $200 million in federal funds. This calls for accountability, including repayments from recipients who misused funds.

During the pandemic, Troy Carter received thousands of dollars from businesses after they received PPP loans.ย Actually, this is only a partial list taken into account for Carter’s corruption perception score.

GORDON MCKERNAN INJURY ATTORNEYS, LLC3/2/2020$500.00
METRO GAMING & AMUSEMENT COMPANY3/3/2020$1,000.00
CHALMETTE AMUSEMENT CO. INC.3/3/2020$1,000.00
ADVANCED GAMING DISTRIBUTORS, LLC$1,000.00
ADAMS AND REESE POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE2/13/2020$500.00
GORDON MCKERNAN INJURY ATTORNEYS, LLC3/2/2020$500.00

These taxpayer backed funds were meant for struggling businesses. Issuing generous campaign contributions after receiving PPP loans raises concerns about the legitimacy of the need for assistance.  

Troy Carter Corruption Perception

Pharmaceutical Industry

When politicians accept significant funding from the pharmaceutical industry, it creates a conflict of interest. It makes it questionable whether they can impartially deliberate on legislation for drug pricing or regulation.

PFIZER INC9/26/2019$500.00
PHRMA12/15/2020$750.00
PHRMA2/29/2020$500.00
PHRMA2/28/2018$500.00
PHRMA11/13/2017$500.00
PHRMA12/22/2016$500.00

Act Blue- Online platforms are scrutinized for giving bad actors a medium to make illegal campaign contributions.

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, so we welcome your feedback. If you see a candidateโ€™s position has changed, send us an email to info@motiontoquash.org with the new information.

Recognized by theย NWC,ย Tracie Burke is author of Motion to Quash. M2Qย supports the Whistleblower Protection Act. If you would like to support journalismย in the public interest,ย click here to donate.ย Motion to Quash ISSN 2644-1594 is the copyrighted property ofย Motion to Quash LLCย .

โ† Back

Thank you for your response. โœจ

external link
This ad is authorized by by Dr. Frederick Graves d/b/a Jurisdictionary

Advertise with Motion to Quash LLC

Troy Carter corrption perception external link

$500 can get you two banners for an entire month. This includes ads across the M2Q website using both branding and call-to-action. Click here to buy ads or use the QR code. Thank you!

Jamie Davis Corruption Perception Score F (56%)

This index focuses on Louisiana DPEC members and U.S. Senate candidate Jamie Davis, who earned a corruption perception score of F (56%), indicating he is perceived as more corrupt than not. The low score is attributed to issues surrounding the False Claims Act and nefarious campaign finance activity. M2Q suggests support for H.R. 6893-SCAM PAC Act to address such issues.

Jamie Davis Corruption Perception Score decorative image

With a corruption perception score of F (56%), Louisiana DPEC member Jamie Davis is perceived as more corrupt than not. Specifically, the Democratic Candidate for the U.S.Senate earned a low score for issues surrounding the False Claims Act. Additionally, his nefarious campaign finance activity strengthens the need to support H.R.6893 – SCAM PAC Act.*

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

decorative image

Corruption Perception Scores for Democratic Candidates for U.S. Senate, U.S. House

Democrat candidates U.S. Senate, U.S. House 2026
Corruption Score is based on three data sources in row 2.
5 total points possible for each one in Row 3.
Scores are calculated in columns C/D
Data SourceMoney IssuedMoney ReceivedDisclosures or conflicts
5 total points possible for each one555
Total (cumulative):15
Candidate AverageB85%5.03.84.0
Nick AlbaresA100%555
Gary CrockettA100%555
Jamie DavisF56%51.42
Lauren JewettF56%51.42
Jim LongA100%555
Troy Carter SrF53%503
Renada CollinsA97%4.854.8
John DayB80%552
Tia LeBrunA100%555
Caleb WalkerA93%554
Conrad CableA100%555
Matt GromlichA100%555
Jessee FleenorA100%555
Larry FoyA100%555
Lindsay GarciaA100%555
Dan McKayA100%555
Tania NymanA100%555
Cleo FieldsF33%500

Source data

We capture expert assessments of various public sector corruption practices, like bribery, campaign finance abuse, and misuse of public funds.

The M2Q corruption perception index is a powerful representation of the stand against corruption in. It serves as a reminder of the importance of transparency and honesty in our political system. Specifically, the scorecards offer precise and reliable judgment in the stand against corruption.

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

**You can find the Ethics Disclosures and campaign finance reports on either the Louisiana Ethics Board or FEC websites. Also, you can find Federal Award profiles at USA Spending.

Jamie Davis Peception Score F 56 external link

Jamie Davis Corruption Perception Score F (56%)

Ethics Disclosures– Issues found

Campaign Finance Abuse-Issues found

Pandemic Oversight

The federal government continues a quiet but active campaign against Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) recipients believed to have committed fraud. It continues to focus on civil False Claims Act cases.

According to M2Q, Jamie Davis is being scrutinized for receiving donations from PPP loan participants. Actually, this is only one example. Check back occasionally for updates, as more info becomes available.

Davis, JamesB.A. ADAMS8/11/2023$1,000.00

During the pandemic, these taxpayer backed funds were meant for struggling businesses. Thus, issuing generous campaign contributions after receiving PPP loans raises concerns about the legitimacy of the need for assistance.  

Simply receiving donations is not enough to prompt an investigation under the False Claims Act. But, generous political contributions from PPP disaster recovery recipients are open to question. Thus, donations linked with reports of Ethics complaints, or IRS violations are enough evidence to lead to criminal prosecution.


Re: Petition for the Issuance and/or Amendment of Rules Regarding Contributions from Untraceable Electronic Payment Methods


Organizational Conflicts of Interest (OCI)– Issues found

Filer NameSourceDateAmount
Forestry Political Action Council
(FORPAC)
JAMES “JAMIE”
DAVIS, JR
11/15/2023$1,000.00

H.R.6893 – SCAM PAC Act


Method

How do we measure corruption scores? 

Since 2019, Motion to Quash has published this index before elections. Basically, it ranks candidates on a scale from 100 (very clean) to 0 (highly corrupt). For consistency, it measures the total scores based on 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, so we welcome your feedback. If you see a candidateโ€™s position has changed, send us an email to info@motiontoquash.org with the new information, or use the contact form below.

Recognized by the NWC, Tracie Burke is author of Motion to Quash. M2Q supports the Whistleblower Protection Act. If you would like to 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 .

Jamie Davis Corruption Perception F 56 internal link

โ† Back

Thank you for your response. โœจ

external link
Dr. Frederick Graves d/b/a Jurisdictionary authorized this ad.
external link

Advertise with Motion to Quash LLC

$500 can get you two banners for an entire month. This includes ads across the M2Q website using both branding and call-to-action. Click here to buy ads or use the QR code. Thank you!

external link

Lauren Jewett Corruption Perception Score: F (56%)

Lauren Jewett Corruption Perception Score: F (56%)

lauren jewett corruption perception decorative image
decorative image

This focus is on the alleged corruption surrounding candidate for U.S. House Dist.1, Lauren Jewett. She scored an “F (59%)” Corruption Perception Score from Motion to Quash (M2Q). This index assesses public sector corruption and campaign finance abuse. Additionally, M2Q criticizes KIPP in New Orleans, which operates within a controversial charter system. M2Q labels it a programmatic failure due to allegations of special education law violations. Other issues include, “abhorrent conditions,” improper disciplinary practices, high teacher turnover, and low college persistence rates.

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

Democrat candidates U.S. Senate, U.S. House 2026
Corruption Score is based on three data sources in row 2.
5 total points possible for each one in Row 3.
Scores are calculated in columns C/D
Data SourceMoney IssuedMoney ReceivedDisclosures or conflicts
5 total points possible for each one555
Total (cumulative):15
Candidate AverageB85%5.03.84.0
Nick AlbaresA100%555
Gary CrockettA100%555
Jamie DavisF56%51.42
Lauren JewettF56%51.42
Jim LongA100%555
Troy Carter SrF53%503
Renada CollinsA97%4.854.8
John DayB80%552
Tia LeBrunA100%555
Caleb WalkerA93%554
Conrad CableA100%555
Matt GromlichA100%555
Jessee FleenorA100%555
Larry FoyA100%555
Lindsay GarciaA100%555
Dan McKayA100%555
Tania NymanA100%555
Cleo FieldsF33%500

 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.

The M2Q corruption perception score is a powerful representation of the stand against corruption in Louisiana. 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.

**M2Q obtained campaign finance reports from the Louisiana Ethics Board website. Federal Award profiles were found at: https://www.usaspending.gov/recipient

USA Spending external link

Lauren Jewett Corruption Perception Score: F (56%)

Ethics Disclosures– Issues found

Campaign Finance– Issues found.

Pandemic Oversight

The U.S. Government is quietly but actively pursuing a campaign against Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) recipients believed to have committed fraud. The government is expected to continue to pursue civil False Claims Act cases.

Essentially, these taxpayer backed funds were meant for struggling businesses for disaster assistance. So, issuing generous campaign contributions after receiving PPP loans raises concerns about the legitimacy of the need for assistance.  

Receiving donations is not enough to prompt an investigation. But, generous political contributions from PPP disaster recovery recipients offer enough evidence to lead to criminal prosecution.

The investigation into loan fraud among disaster recovery recipients and Louisiana politicians highlights concerns about the legitimacy of taxpayer-funded assistance. Over 100 businesses donated politically after receiving nearly $200 million in federal funds. Calls for accountability include repayments from recipients who misused funds and government scrutiny of fraudulent PPP loans persists.

False Claims Act

Lindsey Cheek

In 2020, Lindsey Cheek received a taxpayer backed PPP loan of 73,035. Later, Cheek issued $500 to help finance Lauren Jewettโ€™s campaign.This raises concerns about the legitimacy of the need for disaster assistance. These funds were meant for struggling small businesses, not for political contributions. 

Jewett, LaurenLINDSEY CHEEK8/25/2023$500.00

David Levy admitted, “My business got, I think $350k in PPP loans, and I donated more to the Jewett campaign.” M2Q found that PETROTECHNOLOGIES, INC received $186,035 including interest in forgivable loans in the first round in 2020. In the second round in 2021, PETROTECHNOLOGIES, INC received $172,115. That is a significant amount of money. Fraud schemes like these are costliest for taxpayers.


MUR 7062

Numero, Inc– The Federal Election Commission (FEC) conducted a matter (MUR 7062) involving Numero, Inc., which was finalized around 2020 about potential campaign finance issues.


Re: Petition for the Issuance and/or Amendment of Rules Regarding Contributions from Untraceable Electronic Payment Methods


Organizational Conflicts of Interest (OCI)

KIPP- A Programmatic Failure and โ€œabhorrent conditionsโ€ 

KIPP in New Orleans faces criticism as a programmatic failure, contributing to a broader, unstable, and inequitable charter system. In particular, allegations include violating special education laws, improper student disciplinary practices, and low college persistence rates. Further, the network has struggled with high teacher turnover, inadequate support for vulnerable students.

Recently, KIPP neglected to offer required services for an impaired student, which ultimately led to legal disputes with the district. It also caused operational disputes. Additionally, KIPP suspended or expelled students without proper due process, in violation of state laws.

Despite a, “college for all” mission, KIPP New Orleans has struggled with college persistence rates, notes NPR.

Further, KIPP is the largest charter operator in an “all-charter” system. Yet, it operates within a framework criticized for causing high school turnover. This framework also disrupts education for students, say The Progressive and Diane Ravitch’s blog.

Finally, the network has faced criticism for high turnover rates, which impacts the consistency of the educational program, notes EXPOSEDbyCMD

Lauren Jewett Corruption Perception decorative image
Lauren Jewett Corruption Perception decorative image

Method

How do we measure corruption scores? 

Since 2019, Motion to Quash has published this index before elections. Basically, it ranks candidates on a scale from 100 (very clean) to 0 (highly corrupt). For consistency, it measures the total scores based on 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, so we welcome your feedback. If you see a candidateโ€™s position has changed, send us an email to info@motiontoquash.org with the new information, or use the contact form below.

Recognized by theย NWC,ย Tracie Burke is author of Motion to Quash. M2Qย supports the Whistleblower Protection Act. If you would like to support journalismย in the public interest,ย click here to donate.ย Motion to Quash ISSN 2644-1594 is the copyrighted property ofย Motion to Quash LLCย .

Sign up for M2Q updates by using the contact form. If you want, you can unsubscribe anytime.

โ† Back

Thank you for your response. โœจ

external link
This ad is authorized by by Dr. Frederick Graves d/b/a Jurisdictionary

Advertise with Motion to Quash LLC


Get two banners in front of your target audience for an entire month. An effective advertising campaign will include placing ads across the Motion to Quash website using both branding and call-to-action messages.ย Click here to buy adsย or use the QR code.

external link

National Whistleblower Day- An Expression of Gratitude

On National Whistleblower Day, I express my gratitude for the recognition on Capitol Hill and reflect on the significance of this event. I thank the National Whistleblower Center, Stephen Kohn, and FBI Whistleblower Jane Turner for their invaluable support. Locally, Special Agent Jeff Adolph and Senator Pat Connick played critical roles in addressing fraud in Jefferson Parish. Lastly, I appreciate all legislators supporting the Whistleblower Protection Act, which motivates my commitment to furthering my Whistleblower Protection Advocate certification.

National Whistleblower Day

National Whistleblower Day- An Expression of Gratitude

Today, I’m honored to express my sincere gratitude for being recognized on National Whistleblower Day on Capitol Hill. Thank you for being here. Every July, we celebrate this day and I think deeply about the event’s importance. Without your support, I could not promote laws for whistleblowers in Louisiana.

Nationally

National Whistleblower Day external link

First, thank you to the National Whistleblower Center and to attorney and advocate Stephen Kohn for providing Handbooks for Whistleblowers. Also, I want to express gratitude to Jane Turner, FBI Whistleblower and Board Member of the National Whistleblower Center. Her support and resources help us with the adverse challenges we face.

external link

Locally

Also, Special Agent Jeff Adolph with JPOIG deserves thanks on this National Whistleblower Day, for his confidential investigations. He found misuse of government funds, fraud, and abuse in Jefferson Parish. I also thank Louisiana Senator Pat Connick for his excellent communication and continued guidance. Additionally, the Louisiana Ethics Administration has been so helpful with its Ethics and campaign finance opinions. Specifically, Kathleen Allen who helped with my questions and training.

Legislators

Finally, a special appreciation to the many legislators who offer support and insight to the Whistleblower Protection Act. Your support strengthens my dedication to progressing my Whistleblower Protection Advocate (WPA) Certification, Education and Training. I can’t thank you enough.

I wish you all well.

Hi Tracie,

Weโ€™re thrilled to have you join us for this powerful event honoring the brave individuals who speak up for truth and accountability. Your presence is crucial as we celebrate the significant role of whistleblowers in history. Since 1778 โ€” when America passed its first whistleblower protection law โ€” whistleblowers have shaped our democracy and protected our rights. Want to learn more? Get the whole backstory and legal evolution in Rules for Whistleblowers: A Handbook for Doing Whatโ€™s Right, written by whistleblower attorney and advocate Stephen M. Kohn.
Read the History of National Whistleblower Day
Sincerely, Jane Turner FBI Whistleblower and Board Member National Whistleblower Center

Call or write your legislators! Beyond contacting legislators, take action like sharing stories or spreading awareness on social media.

Call or write to your legislators today and urge them to support the Whistleblower Protection Act Click here to contact US Congress

Recognized by theย National Whistleblower Center, Tracie Burke is Louisiana author of Motion to Quash. You can reach her atย tracie@motiontoquash.org. If you would like to support journalism in the public interest, DONATE here. Motion to Quash LLC supports the Whistleblower Protection Act.ย Motion to Quash ISSN 2644-1594 is the copyrighted property ofย Motion to Quash LLCย .ย 

National Whistleblower Day external link
This ad is authorized by by Dr. Frederick Graves d/b/a Jurisdictionary
external link
This ad is authorized by the Tracie Burke Campaign Committee
National Whistleblower Day- An Expression of Gratitude external link

Advertise with Motion to Quash LLC


$500 can get you two banners in front of your target audience for an entire month. An effective advertising campaign will include placing ads across the Motion to Quash website using both branding and call-to-action messages. Click here to buy ads or use the QR code.

external link

Opposition to HB390: A Knowledge Synthesis

The Louisiana Civic Coalition opposes HB390, arguing it disproportionately impacts low-income smokers, promotes illicit trade, causes economic harm, and is ineffective in reducing consumption. They contend that higher taxes limit personal freedom and individual responsibility, urging House Representatives to reject the bill for its negative effects on citizens.

Opposition to HB390: A Knowledge Synthesis external link

Opposition to HB390: A Knowledge Synthesis

Our opposition to HB390, levying extra taxes on cigarettes, centers on these 5 negative consequences:

1. Regressivity:

We argue that increased taxes disproportionately burden low-income individuals. These individuals are more bound to smoke. They spend a larger part of their income on tobacco products.

2. Impact on Illicit Trade:

We suggest that higher taxes create larger incentives for tax avoidance and evasion. This situation can lead to increased smuggling. It can also result in the use of counterfeit tobacco products.

3. Economic Effects:

We argue increased taxes can negatively impact businesses and lead to job losses in the tobacco industry.

4. Limited Effectiveness in Reducing Consumption:

Nicotine is addictive. We argue that increasing the price of cigarettes through taxation will not significantly reduce smoking rates. It leads smokers to pay more. Alternatively, they seek cheaper, illicit, alternatives.

The International Environments Research and Public Health indicates that taxes do have some impact, particularly on youth and young adults. Nevertheless, the effects are limited for heavily addicted or long-term smokers. Evidence was lacking about the impact of price on smoking behavior in persons with a dual diagnosis. There was also a lack of evidence for heavy and/or long-term smokers and Aboriginal people. Of 22 studies on the role of price in preventing smoking initiation, 9 found that it does not. 

5. Paternalism:

Our opposition to HB390 contends that increasing taxes on tobacco products is paternalistic. It infringes on individual liberty by attempting to control personal choices. 

Such laws as HB390 undermine individual responsibility and autonomy. HB390 creates a tension between individual freedom and the state’s obligation to protect its citizens. 

For these reasons, we urge House Representatives to oppose HB390 next session.

Louisiana Civic Coalition 

laciviccoalition@gmail.com

Join us

This ad for Louisiana Civic Coalition is used with permission. No copyright infringement intended.

Recognized by theย NWC,ย Tracie Burke is author of Motion to Quash. M2Qย supports the Whistleblower Protection Act. If you would like to support journalismย in the public interest,ย click here to donate.ย Motion to Quash ISSN 2644-1594 is the copyrighted property ofย Motion to Quash LLCย .

external link
This ad is authorized by the Tracie Burke Campaign Committee
external link
This ad is authorized by by Dr. Frederick Graves d/b/a Jurisdictionary
Opposition to HB390: A Knowledge Synthesis external link

Advertise with Motion to Quash LLC

$500 can get you two banners in front of your target audience for an entire month. An effective advertising campaign will include placing ads across the Motion to Quash website using both branding and call-to-action messages. Click here to buy ads or use the QR code.

Opposition to HB390: A Knowledge Synthesis external link

Congressional Bill Strengthens Whistleblower Rights in 2025

MOTION TO QUASH | APRIL 4, 2025 

Overview

Motion to Quash celebrates the long-awaited introduction of the Whistleblower Protection Act of 2025. This landmark Congressional bill Strengthens Whistleblower Rights. It directly addresses long-standing legal gaps. These gaps have left federal employees vulnerable to retaliation for speaking truth to power. This is especially true when testifying before Congress.

Significance of the Bill

The legislation, spearheaded by Sen. Richard Blumenthal, would finally guarantee enforceable legal remedies. These remedies are for federal employees, contractors, and applicants who face retaliation for communicating with Congress. Critically, the bill ensures access to courts and jury trialsโ€”rights long denied to federal whistleblowers despite being guaranteed in law.

โ€œThis law is a significant step for federal employees,โ€ said Stephen M. Kohn, Chairman of the National Whistleblower Center. โ€œRetaliation against whistleblowers who testify before Congress is unacceptable and unconstitutional. This law is highly significant and should be passed quickly. It is absolutely necessary if Congress is serious about engaging in meaningful oversight.โ€

The bill amends 5 U.S.C. ยง 7211 to create clear administrative and judicial remedies. These remedies include the right to seek damages, reinstatement, attorney fees, and jury trials. It extends protection to current federal employees. It also protects former employees, contractors, and job applicants. This is a critical expansion, given the modern federal workforce structure.

Call to Action

Motion to Quash campaigned for years on behalf of the NWC to fix these legislative gaps. In January, M2Q and other advocates renewed their call for action. They warned that without enforceable rights, constitutional protections stay hollow. This bill reflects decades of bipartisan concern and persistent advocacy by whistleblowers and public interest groups. Truly, a Bill that Strengthens Whistleblower Rights

The announcement of this Congressional bill is a testament to the work of countless whistleblowers. Many allies also contributed to the fight for protections that most private-sector employees already enjoy. It marks a turning point in restoring credibility and accountability in the federal government.

Motion to Quash urges swift passage of this bill. It pledges to continue fighting until these protections are signed into law.

Recognized by theย NWC,ย Tracie Burke is author of Motion to Quash. M2Qย supports the Whistleblower Protection Act. If you would like to support journalismย in the public interest,ย click here to donate.ย Motion to Quash ISSN 2644-1594 is the copyrighted property ofย Motion to Quash LLCย .

bill strengthens whistleblower rights external link

Subscribe

Sign up for our newsletter and stay up to date

*
*
*

M2Q Corruption Index: Analysis of Jefferson Parish 2025 Candidates

M2Q Corruption Index

The Motion to Quash (M2Q) Corruption Index collects data from multiple sources to produces a corruption perception score.*

M2Q Corruption Score decorative image

Source Data

M2Q captured expert assessments of various public sector corruption practices. At length, this includes bribery and misuse of public funds. Additionally, it involves abuse of public office for personal gain, nepotism in civil service, and state capture. 

Then, M2Q scrupulously took into account 3 different assessments from 22 political candidates in Jefferson Parish. Half are unopposed.

M2Q Corruption inex decorative image

 Corruption Perception Overview

Generally, the average corruption perception score for Jefferson Parish candidates is C (71%). Overall, fourteen candidates scored A, four candidates scored F, and two scored D. Only one scored B and only one scored C. 

The M2Q corruption perception score is a powerful representation of the stand against corruption in Jefferson Parish. It helpfully serves as a reminder of the importance of transparency and honesty in our political system.

Additionally, 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.

Click the name to view the folder for each candidate

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%

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

M2Q corruption Index external link usa spending

Pandemic Oversight

The U.S. Government continues to pursue a quiet but active campaign against Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) recipients they believe 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? 

Historically, Motion to Quash publishes the corruption scores before elections. It ranks candidates on a scale from 100 (very clean) to 0 (highly corrupt). For consistency, we base the total scores 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 earn 15 points for the whole package do they score 100 percent. 

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

Recognized by theย NWC,ย Tracie Burke is author of Motion to Quash. M2Qย supports the Whistleblower Protection Act. If you would like to support journalismย in the public interest,ย click here to donate.ย Motion to Quash ISSN 2644-1594 is the copyrighted property ofย Motion to Quash LLCย .

โ† Back

Thank you for your response. โœจ

external link
This ad is authorized by by Dr. Frederick Graves d/b/a Jurisdictionary

How to Win in Court Without a Lawyer

How to Win in Court Without a Lawyer emphasizes the importance of self-advocacy in legal matters. It asserts that individuals have the right to learn how to win in court without hiring a lawyer. Judge Anthony Bompiani offers a comprehensive course. It outlines the steps to win cases. The course provides various resources like video seminars, audio guides, and sample forms. With 27 years of experience, he has successfully helped diverse individuals achieve justice. The program teaches critical tactics like controlling evidence, legal research, and understanding court procedures. It promotes the message that anyone can navigate the legal system effectively and win cases through knowledge and preparedness.

Enforce your rights! You have a right to know how to win in court without hiring a lawyer. Knowing how to win in court is your #1 Right. The case-winning power Judge Anthony Bompiani teaches is hidden by the Bar.

Click here to learn how to win in court without a lawyer.

Winning is Easy!

Every case starts with the same steps.

Each case ends with the same steps.

Every case is won with the same steps.

Learn ALL the steps with this course!

Everything you need is here.

Video seminar “shows” the steps.

Downloadable audio “explains” the steps.

Sample forms.

Simplified explanations.

Oblige judges to follow the law.

Force lawyers to obey the rules.

For 27 years these case-winning tutorials have guided people. (single parents, truck drivers, young married couples, mature adults, the wrongfully accused, etc.) They obtained Justice … without a lawyer!

What to do, when to do it, and how to do it  according to the rules!

Judge Anthony has been a licensed attorney for 38 years. He has won cases for his clients. He shows tens of thousands of his online students how to get Justice. You will learn quickly with his case-winning tactics.

How to win in Court Without a Lawyer- Tactics that WORK!

Why guess when you can know?

Online legal research.

Legal dictionary.

Chat room.

Users forum.

Honorary Law Degree.

Click here to learn how to win without a lawyer.

Win without a lawyer!

Force witnesses to answer questions. If they refuse, have them thrown in jail until they answer.

Compel opponents to produce evidence. If they refuse, have them thrown in jail until they produce.

THIS POWER BELONGS TO YOU!
Money Back Guarantee

Learn how to get Justice!

Understand at your own pace … step-by-step.

Online 24 hours, 7 days a week.

Jurisdictionaryยฎ … teaching people how to win since 1997.

How to win in Court Without a Lawyer- Everything You Need!
  • Evidence Rules Made Easy
  • How to Make Objections
  • The Key to Winning !
  • Why Winning Is Easy
  • The Essential Elements
  • 2ยฝ Hour Audio Classroom
  • 5 Hour Video Seminar
  • Sample Legal Forms
  • How to Control Lawyers
  • Techniques to Control Judges
  • How to Use Affidavits

The Basics

  • Approaches to Argue Effectively
  • How to Get Court Orders
  • Instructions to File Motions
  • How to Use Depositions
  • Pleadings in General
  • How to Write a Complaint
  • Guidelines to Write an Answer
  • How to Get Evidence
  • Ways to Compel Evidence
  • How to File Defenses

Essentials

  • Procedures to Stop Foreclosure
  • How to Win in Family Court
  • How to Win on Appeal
  • Child Custody Tactics
  • How to Read Laws
  • How to Use Stipulations
  • Tips to Prepare for Court
  • How to Do Legal Research
  • Instructions to Use Legal Citations
  • How to Stay Out of Jail
  • Claims & Causes of Action
  • Show Cause Procedures
  • Circumstantial Evidence
  • Summary Judgment
  • Default Judgment Tactics
  • Easy Guide and Flowchart
  • Trial Prep & Procedure
  • Online Q&A Legal Forum
  • Online Legal Research
  • How to Collect Judgments
  • How to Find Rules of Court
  • Legal Writing Tips
  • Common Law Maxims
  • Contract Law Basics
  • Property Law Basics
  • Foundations of Law
  • Natural Law Principles
  • Guide to Rules of Order
  • Why You Need this Course

Click here to learn how to win in court without a lawyer

Recognized by theย NWC,ย Tracie Burke is author of Motion to Quash. M2Qย supports the Whistleblower Protection Act. If you would like to support journalismย in the public interest,ย click here to donate.ย Motion to Quash ISSN 2644-1594 is the copyrighted property ofย Motion to Quash LLCย .

This advertisement is used with permission. No copyright infringement is intended. The referral links in this article earn a commission for Motion to Quash LLC from Judge Anthony Bombiani.

How to Win in Court Without a Lawyer external link

Digital media provides measurable results. $500 can get you two banners in front of your target audience for an entire month. An effective advertising campaign will include placing ads across the Motion to Quash website using both branding and call-to-action messages. Click here to buy ads or use the QR code.

How to Win in Court Without a Lawyer External link