Phillip “Bert” Callais, lead Plaintiff in Callais v. Landry, the redistricting case pending before the United States Supreme Court entailing the map which reconfigured U. S. Congressional District 6 which prompted then-incumbent Congressman Garret Graves not to seek reelection and provided the pathway for eventual-candidate Cleo Fields to return to the U. S. Congress after about a 28-year hiatus.
Visitors to our blog may recall our October 14, 2025 feature in which former Grant Parish DA Ed Tarpley referenced Louisiana Gov. Jeff Landry and Attorney General Liz Murrill as “disgraces.” Tarpley’s basis for referencing Landry and Murrill as “disgraces” stems from his contention that they combined to, “author this unbelievable District. This gerrymandered District…..giving the seat (of former Congressman Graves) to one of the worst Democrats in the world, Cleo Fields.”
Understandably, Landry was not pleased with Tarpley’s commentary, so he had one of his on-staff attorneys, Brett Robinson, make a request for him to speak remotely to the audience (Tarpley had also addressed the audience remotely). Obviously, Landry’s request was granted, and he emphasized that Louisiana citizens need to respect the hard work of him and Murrill.
Recently, we had the opportunity to interview the lead Plaintiff (there are 11 other Plaintiffs) in the redistricting case, Phillip “Bert” Callais, and he provided his thoughts on Landry and the map Tarpley referenced in his lambasting of Gov. Landry:
Callais conveys his sentiments regarding Gov. Landry’s 10/14/25 statements countering former Grant Parish DA Ed Tarpley referencing Landry as a “disgrace.”
Callais is actually most passionate about “election integrity,” and he contacted Sound Off Louisiana to be afforded an opportunity to “sound off” about his very strong resolve to strengthen Louisiana’s voter integrity to include his strong advocacy for paper ballots:
Callais “sounds off” regarding his strong resolve for strengthening Louisiana’s “voter integrity” and calls upon citizens to actively participate in the process.
At several points in the interview above, Burns references this January 5, 2026 appearance of Secretary of State Nancy Landry and Burns’ recollection of her statements entailing paper ballots, etc. We have provided the direct link to Landry’s presentation so, as Burns states on the video, if he didn’t properly state Landry’s thoughts on anything (Burns was going on memory), blame him (Burns), and not Landry!
Qualifying for the election of May 16, 2026 is now closed, and anyone can view qualified candidates for any race here.
For anyone who may be confused on the matter, be aware that the existing maps for the U. S. Congress WILL be the maps used for the upcoming elections! Any ruling by the U. S. Supreme Court regarding redistricting will not affect the maps for the upcoming elections.
Finally, as everyone is surely aware, our endorsed candidate for the U. S. Senate race, State Sen. Blake Miguez, had to pivot after President Trump convinced Fifth Congressional District Congresswoman Julia Letlow to run against Bill Cassidy for his U. S. Senate seat. Miguez is now a candidate to replace Letlow, and he has our full and enthusiastic support in his quest to replace her.
Further, Burns, being in the Fifth District, will obviously be voting for him. In coming weeks, Burns may opt to produce a Sound Off Louisiana feature entailing one of Miguez’s opponents for whom Burns is extremely frustrated!
Regarding the U. S. Senate race, we are not making any public statement about whom we intend to support. The only point we wish to make is a statement of fact: Media reports going all the way back to May 10, 2025 demonstrate that Gov. Landry has pushed for Letlow to enter the U. S. Senate race and further that he lobbied Trump to endorse her. So, clearly, Letlow is (and has been for a long time) Landry’s “chosen one” for the race.
Recently, Louisiana Treasurer (and former U. S. Congressman) John Fleming, who has been and remains a candidate for that U. S. Senate seat, openly stated that Landry had done as reported by the AP above regarding Trump/Letlow, causing Landry to essentially lose all composure (he’s pretty good at that!) with Landry going so far as to say that Fleming, “may not be fit to hold office.” From the just-linked feature:
On Wednesday, while signing up to run for the U.S. Senate race, Fleming publicly said Landry had been working for over a year on a “scheme” to help win Trump’s endorsement of Letlow.
Gov. Jeff Landry on Thursday fired back at Louisiana Treasurer John Fleming, who is running in a competitive U.S. Senate race against incumbent Sen. Bill Cassidy and Rep. Julia Letlow, after Fleming accused Landry of orchestrating Trump’s endorsement of Letlow.
“Anyone who makes stuff up like that may not be fit for office,” Landry responded in a statement Thursday.
As we indicated above, that’s likely the last anyone will hear out of us on the U. S. Senate race, but rest assured, the television airwaves will be filled with ads by all three major contenders for that U. S. Senate race.
We want to thank Bert Callais for reaching out to Sound Off Louisiana and, as we indicated on the video above, he is welcome to return to provide updates or any other thoughts he may have at any time.
I share Mr. Callais’ concern for integrity in our elections. However, I disagree that we need to go back to paper ballots. Paper systems are far less secure, less accurate, and much easier to manipulate. And to Mr. Burn’s point, they are also excruciatingly slow and difficult to count. When it comes to technology, it is hard to trust things we don’t understand, yet we do it every single day. I would be willing to bet that just about every dime that most people have to their name is electronic, not paper. Our retirement and investment accounts are electronic, not paper. The vehicles we drive are electronic, not manual. The medical tests that doctors use to keep us alive are electronic. The days of manual paper systems are behind us.
So why do so many people that trust technology with their money, their retirement, and their lives want to go back 100 years to paper ballots for elections? One contributing factor is the well-deserved lack of trust in mainstream media. I’m sure there are others.
So, is there a compromise we could all live with? I think we can have the best of both worlds, the speed, accuracy, and security of digital elections with feel-good transparency for those like Mr. Callais. For starters, I agree with Mr. Callais we should have video cameras in every nook and cranny of election offices. Sunlight is the best disinfectant. There are voting systems that offer both electronic voting and paper ballots. When you arrive, they hand you a paper ballot. You take the ballot and insert it into a voting machine. You vote electronically, using big clear buttons. You confirm and then cast your vote. Your actual votes are printed on the paper ballot in easy-to-read English. You review the paper ballot for accuracy. You then take that ballot to another machine and insert it, which scans the ballot creating yet another readable digital record. Now you have two electronic records stored in two different systems, an image of the ballot, and a paper ballot. The election office compares the two redundant electronic records (from different systems) and posts the vote within an hour of polls closing. Then they post scanned images of every ballot and all the election videos on the Internet for everyone to see. Full transparency, and they still have the paper if needed. As is the current practice, these voting systems must be certified by third parties every election cycle.