KOENIG: Is the LA Secretary of State Becoming Too Powerful?

May 12th, 2025 Nathan Koenig

If you want to know who is in power, find out who or what you’re not allowed to criticize. This adage lends often lends itself to the political arena—where politicians or groups punish their detractors as a method to maintain political power.

Over the course of this legislative session, I have noticed that there is one elected office that appears to be above criticism in the state of Louisiana: the Secretary of State.

Per the Louisiana Constitution, the Secretary of State is the “chief election officer of the state. He shall prepare and certify the ballots for all elections, promulgate all election returns, and administer the election laws, except those relating to voter registration and custody of voting machines. ”

This process is simple enough. The Louisiana Legislature passes election-related laws, and the Secretary of State administers those laws. This system of checks and balances makes sense as one would not want a single politician making all of the decisions regarding Louisiana, right?

The unfortunate reality is that many Louisiana legislators have completely deferred their responsibility to legislate when it comes to the topic of elections in Louisiana. If you ask the average legislator in Louisiana about Louisiana’s voting systems, then you would probably get a confused look on their face and then they’ll tell you how great the Louisiana Secretary of State is (believe me, I have seen this experience first-hand multiple times).

Because our legislators don’t seem to hold much interest in Louisiana’s voting processes, they often defer to and craft legislation on behalf of the Louisiana Secretary of State. Don’t just take my word for it, there are several bills in the 2025 Legislative session that are making the Louisiana Secretary of State look more and more like the unquestioned elections czar in Louisiana.

Here are just a couple of the concerning bills in question that will likely roll through the Legislature with little to no opposition despite understandable concerns coming from Louisiana voters:

–HB 577: This bill changes the current public bidding process for voting systems in Louisiana to a closed bid negotiated by the Secretary of State’s office (see HB 577, SS 1362). In effect, this legislation removes a significant amount of transparency to the Louisiana public and unnecessarily provides more power to the LA Secretary of State.

The Louisiana House of Representatives passed this bill 98-0 last week.

As a personal rule of thumb, unanimous support in a legislative body is often a concerning indicator as to whether or not legislators actually understand what they are indeed voting on. Do we really need more closed door meetings in Louisiana politics?

–HB 206: This bill would allow election officials to enter an agreement conflicting with Louisiana’s election laws if “authorized by adoption of a concurrent resolution approved by a majority of the elected members of each house of the legislature.”

The Louisiana House of Representatives passed this bill 88-9 two weeks ago.

–HB 592: This bill will no longer require the LA SOS to use address data from the United States Postal Service to verify the addresses of registered voters (see HB 5952, SS 192).

The Louisiana House of Representatives passed this bill 75-16 two weeks ago.

When viewing these bills in total, we can see that the Legislature is granting more power over Louisiana elections to Secretary of State Nancy Landry and her office. This power consolidation is concerning when you understand that Secretary Landry is looking to replace Louisiana’s aged, unauditable direct-recording electronic (DRE) voting machines—which the state of Florida replaced with a paper ballot voting system due to security issues associated with DRE systems.

If legislation like HB 577 or HB 592 becomes law, then we honestly need to take a look at the concerning levels of power the Louisiana Secretary of State’s office holds in our state. Do we really want just one politician to have complete control over how picking Louisiana’s voting systems? Why is Louisiana’s supposed “most conservative legislature” allowing a statewide politician to centralize power?

I hope that Louisiana citizens might receive some answers to these pressing questions and concerns over Louisiana’s voting systems. Repeating the same talking points about a flawed election integrity scorecard from the establishment-backed Heritage Foundation won’t quell the legitimate concerns that many Louisiana citizens share about Louisiana’s voting systems.

Nathan Koenig is a frequent contributor to RVIVR.com, a national conservative political site affiliated with The Hayride. Follow his writing on the Louisiana First Standard Substack, on Twitter (X) @LAFirstStandard, on Tik Tok @la.first.standard & on Instagram @lafirststandard. Email him here: louisianafirststandard@proton.me

Interested in more news from Louisiana? We've got you covered! See More Louisiana News

Trending on The Hayride

No trending posts were found.

Carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) is quite obviously a sham. It does not produce anything of real economic value. Like the derivatives that led to the 2008 financial crash, the economic value of CCS is very much an illusion, which will likely bring about another disaster in its wake, whether financial or otherwise. Nor does it benefit the environment, as carbon dioxide is not causing rapid warming of the planet. As we noted once before here at The Hayride, CO2 levels rise in response to rising temperatures, not the other way around. There is thus no good reason for enormous amounts of money to be ‘invested’ in CCS. Why, then, is it being promoted so heavily? Because it furthers the cause of globalist control of mankind (and worse, as we shall see), a process termed technocracy by a relentless researcher into it, Patrick Wood. The New World Order types began ballyhooing about CO2 in 1968 at a meeting of the Club of Rome. They published the findings of their research in a 1972 book, The Limits of Growth, in which to no one’s amazement they wrote breathlessly (cue Rush Limbaugh’s mock panting) about CO2 ‘causing irreversible changes in the earth’s climate’ (p. 81, PDF version; available as a free download here). The vilifying of carbon dioxide, which is essential to the flourishing of plants and the production by them in turn of the oxygen that people and animals need, has produced in our own day things like carbon credits to offset one’s carbon footprint:

‘CERs [Certified Emission Reductions—W.G.] are units (carbon credits) issued by UNFCCC, measured in tonnes of CO₂ equivalent. Anyone can purchase these units on this platform to compensate (or offset) emissions and/or to support these projects. They can be used by individuals, businesses and organizations to reach carbon neutrality by compensating their footprints, while they help project developers to continue to finance their green projects. The prices per unit are set by project developers, who also receive the full profits from the sale of the units directly: UN Climate Change is not a party to the CER cancellation contract between purchaser and provider. The platform is free of charge, for both buyers and sellers’ (‘United Nations Carbon Offset Platform,’ unfccc.int).

Some of these scams/schemes remain voluntary, for the moment. But they are swiftly moving into the realm of mandatory participation. In Europe, for example:

‘Starting in 2027, the European Union will expand its emissions trading system (ETS) into new territory with the launch of ETS2. While the original ETS primarily targeted heavy industry and power plants, ETS2 directly impacts ordinary citizens — their homes, their cars, their daily lives. Under the guise of ’saving the climate,’ the EU will steadily make gasoline, diesel, and gas for heating more expensive. But let’s be honest: ETS2 has very little to do with protecting the environment. It is about economic control, wealth redistribution, and the consolidation of power among banks, large corporations, governments, and the European Commission. ‘Formally, everything remains ‘voluntary.’ You may continue driving a gasoline car. You may continue heating your home with natural gas. But every choice that deviates from the state’s ‘sustainability goals’ will become economically unbearable. This is not a direct expropriation of property, but it is economic subjugation through price pressure, regulation, and redistribution of the proceeds. Instead of free choices, citizens and companies are financially forced to adopt government-approved behavior’ (Rob Roos, ‘Freedom in the EU? Only if You Can Afford It,’ europeanconservative.com).

Where is all of this heading, someone may be wondering? Patrick Wood gives an indication:

‘The deathly economic state of today’s world is a direct reflection of the sum of its sick and dying currencies, but this could soon change. Forces are already at work to position a new Carbon Currency as the ultimate solution to global calls for poverty reduction, population control, environmental control, global warming, energy allocation and blanket distribution of economic wealth. Unfortunately for individual people living in this new system, it will also require authoritarian and centralized control over all aspects of life, from cradle to grave. What is Carbon Currency and how does it work? In a nutshell, Carbon Currency will be based on the regular allocation of available energy to the people of the world. If not used within a period of time, the Currency will expire (like monthly minutes on your cell phone plan) so that the same people can receive a new allocation based on new energy production quotas for the next period. Because the energy supply chain is already dominated by the global elite, setting energy production quotas will limit the amount of Carbon Currency in circulation at any one time. It will also naturally limit manufacturing, food production and people movement. Local currencies could remain in play for a time, but they would eventually wither and be fully replaced by the Carbon Currency, much the same way that the Euro displaced individual European currencies over a period of time. ‘ . . . The Technocrat’s avoidance of social entropy is to increase the efficiency of society by the careful allocation of available energy and measuring subsequent output in order to find a state of “equilibrium,” or balance. Hubbert’s focus on entropy is evidenced by Technocracy, Inc.’s logo, the well-known Yin Yang symbol that depicts balance. To facilitate this equilibrium between man and nature, Technocracy proposed that citizens would receive Energy Certificates in order to operate the economy: ‘“Energy Certificates are issued individually to every adult of the entire population… The record of one’s income and its rate of expenditure is kept by the Distribution Sequence, so that it is a simple matter at any time for the Distribution Sequence to ascertain the state of a given customer’s balance... When making purchases of either goods or services an individual surrenders the Energy Certificates properly identified and signed. “The significance of this, from the point of view of knowledge of what is going on in the social system, and of social control, can best be appreciated when one surveys the whole system in perspective. First, one single organization is manning and operating the whole social mechanism. The same organization not only produces but also distributes all goods and services. “With this information clearing continuously to a central headquarters we have a case exactly analogous to the control panel of a power plant, or the bridge of an ocean liner…” [Technocracy Study Course, Hubbert & Scott,p. 238-239]

‘Two key differences between price-based money and Energy Certificates are that a) money is generic to the holder while Certificates are individually registered to each citizen and b) money persists while Certificates expire. The latter facet would greatly hinder, if not altogether prevent, the accumulation of wealth and property.

‘ . . . Because of the connection between the environmental movement, global warming and the Technocratic concept of Energy Certificates, one would expect that a Carbon Currency would be suggested from that particular community, and in fact, this is the case. In 1995, Judith Hanna wrote in New Scientist, “Toward a single carbon currency”, “My proposal is to set a global quota for fossil fuel combustion every year, and to share it equally between all the adults in the world.” . . . ‘In 2007, New York Times published “When Carbon Is Currency” by Hannah Fairfield. She pointedly stated “To build a carbon market, its originators must create a currency of carbon credits that participants can trade.” PointCarbon, a leading global consultancy, is partnered with Bank of New York Mellon to assess rapidly growing carbon markets. In 2008 they published “Towards a Common Carbon Currency: Exploring the prospects for integrated global carbon markets.” This report discusses both environmental and economic efficiency in a similar context as originally seen with Hubbert in 1933. Finally, on November 9 2009, the Telegraph (UK) presented an article “Everyone in Britain could be given a personal ‘carbon allowance.’” ‘“… implementing individual carbon allowances for every person will be the most effective way of meeting the targets for cutting greenhouse gas emissions. It would involve people being issued with a unique number which they would hand over when purchasing products that contribute to their carbon footprint, such as fuel, airline tickets and electricity. Like with a bank account, a statement would be sent out each month to help people keep track of what they are using. If their "carbon account" hits zero, they would have to pay to get more credits”. [Emphasis added]’ (‘Carbon Currency: A New Beginning for Technocracy?,’ canadafreepress.com).

For the globalist technocrats, human beings are a scourge, like locusts or deadly bacteria, whose presence must be greatly decreased for the world to flourish. Such thinking, ultimately, is the result of their closeness to Satan, whose malice towards mankind has been evident from the Garden of Eden. Yet mankind is not the problem. It is his sinfulness that is the problem. When men and women live lives in opposition to the All-Holy Trinity, then the natural world does indeed suffer, producing deformed creatures like giant human beings and monstrously large insects and plants, which the world saw immediately prior to the great cataclysm of the Flood described in Genesis (Fr Daniel Sysoev, A Chronicle of the Beginning, Fr Nathan Williams translator, Daniel Sysoev Inc, New Jersey, 2023, p. 176). But when man lives in harmony with God, then there is rejoicing amongst all living things, as the Holy Prophet Ezekiel described in a prophecy to the Jewish people while they were captives to the Babylonians:

‘8 But you, O mountains of Israel, shall shoot forth your branches, and yield your fruit to my people Israel; for they will soon come home. 9 For, behold, I am for you, and I will turn to you, and you shall be tilled and sown; 10 and I will multiply men upon you, the whole house of Israel, all of it; the cities shall be inhabited and the waste places rebuilt; 11 and I will multiply upon you man and beast; and they shall increase and be fruitful; and I will cause you to be inhabited as in your former times, and will do more good to you than ever before. Then you will know that I am the LORD. 12 Yea, I will let men walk upon you, even my people Israel; and they shall possess you, and you shall be their inheritance, and you shall no longer bereave them of children’ (Ezekiel 36:8-12, orthodoxchurchfathers.com).

Carbon capture and sequestration is an insidious way to condition people to accept the satanic view that mankind and the carbon dioxide he produces are evils spreading across the globe, of which it must be ‘cured,’ by extreme measures if necessary. And they are necessary, we are repeatedly being told: The earth cannot carry all the people she is carrying; we must ‘defuse the population explosion’ (Club of Rome in The Limits of Growth, p. 17); the number of people must be reduced, via abortion, euthanasia, war, sterilization, and all the rest of it, a theme that is repeated over and over again in the literature written by the demonically controlled elite. There are other aspects of it – control, profits, etc. – but the hatred and killing of man is the ultimate Satanic goal: a return, in other words, to the ritualistic sacrifices that took place amongst the Aztecs and in Carthage, for instance, only this time in the name of Gaia, Mother Earth, to save and purify her. For these reasons we pray that God would bless the efforts of Owen, McCormick, Schamerhorn, and others in Louisiana and the other States who are trying to put an end to CCS. And, likewise, that St Martin of Tours would bring supporters of CCS, like Gov Landry, to their senses, that they would stop this insidious madness before it becomes entrenched any further anywhere else within the US.

More Quotes