(Citizens for a New Louisiana) — We’ve all read The Advocate’s “sweeping exposé” declaring that Louisiana’s infant mortality crisis is “shocking,” “inhumane,” and “unacceptable.” According to the paper, our state has “one of the highest rates of infant mortality in the developed world — and it’s not getting any better.” The article vaguely insists that Louisiana lawmakers have “passed up many chances to do more” and demands that somebody — anybody — finally act.

These are strong words meant to spark action. But the Advocate missed the action entirely — as usual.

A Simple, No-Cost Reform Meant to Improve Infant Autopsies

Back in 2024, Freedom Caucus chair and State Rep. Beryl Amedee introduced House Bill 288, a straightforward and nearly effortless reform. In cases where an infant dies unexpectedly and with no explanation, coroners must already perform mandatory autopsies. Amedee’s bill simply required them to include one additional piece of data: the infant’s immunization record.

Not to imply causation; not to cast blame; not to change any medical procedure. It was just attaching an existing document — one click, one printout, perhaps two minutes. To head off confusion, Amedee even added a clause stating explicitly that including the immunization record “does not imply cause of death.”

It was, quite literally, the smallest possible improvement Louisiana could make toward complete, research-ready infant mortality investigations. And it was exactly the kind of “doing more” the Advocate publicly insists lawmakers never do.

Committee: Unanimous Support — and Enthusiasm

In committee, the bill passed favorably without objection. Some coroners and investigators even told Amedee they already include immunization records voluntarily. Parents of lost infants testified to how desperate they are for any additional information. Health Freedom Louisiana and others supported the measure.

No coroners testified against it; no medical associations objected; no fiscal concerns were raised; no privacy issues emerged.

Floor: An Anonymous Note Kills the Bill

Then came the floor debate. Just before the discussion began, members found a surprise waiting on their desks: a mysterious, unsigned note, purportedly from the Coroners Association. No names, no reasons, no explanations, no contact information — not even an argument. Just a quiet “we don’t like this” drifting in from the bureaucratic shadows.

And that was all it took.

Despite unanimous committee support, the bill failed on the House floor in a razor-thin 50–51 vote. No one presented evidence against it; no one offered expert testimony; no one explained how printing a document from the LINKS system could possibly be “too burdensome” when infants’ lives are at stake.

As Amedee explained plainly, coroners who are physicians already have access to LINKS. Investigators often do too. And the Department of Health can credential any others as needed. But factual clarity wasn’t enough to overcome the political equivalent of an anonymous someone checking the “against” box on a nondescript sheet of paper.

The Advocate’s Hypocrisy

And here’s where the irony becomes impossible to ignore. The same Advocate article that scolds Louisiana lawmakers for “failing on many fronts” and bemoans how officials haven’t seized “many chances to do more” said absolutely nothing when an unsigned bureaucratic note killed a bipartisan, parent-supported, no-cost reform.

The paper’s righteous urgency evaporated the moment the obstruction came from a place too inconvenient to examine. Their editorial fury was pointed in the wrong direction — aimed at the people trying to fix the problem, not the ones quietly keeping it broken.

Meanwhile, the Advocate insists Louisiana must adopt “an attitude that this is shocking and inhumane and unacceptable.” It sure is. Perhaps that’s an attitude they might consider adopting for themselves. One wonders whether HB288 escaped the Advocate’s notice simply because it didn’t require a new tax, a new agency, or a new government program. Their entire article leans on the idea that the only way to fix infant mortality is to spend more money. HB288 quietly challenged that assumption by proving that some solutions require courage — not cash. And that may be why it never made the Advocate’s cut.

This Problem Needs Allies, Not Armchair Critics

So, the next time the Advocate decides to trumpet from on high that “somebody needs to do something,” it might consider doing a little something itself first. A good start would be reading the room before opening its big mouth and promptly inserting its entire foot. A tiny bit of curiosity would have revealed that lawmakers have tried to act.

The real story here isn’t legislative indifference. It’s legislative skittishness — and bureaucratic veto power. None of which the Advocate had the time, space, or inclination to look into… because it doesn’t grow government.

When a single anonymous note can cause half the chamber to dive for the escape hatch, maybe the statewide newspaper shouldn’t be scolding the people who attempted reform. Maybe they should lend them a little encouragement while shining light on the entrenched bureaucracy that routinely kills important, necessary improvements to infant mortality investigations.

As it stands, the Advocate missed a major opportunity to reveal the deeper problem: a bloated, inefficient, and disconnected bureaucratic structure that collapses the moment someone actually tries to fix it.