Louisiana Voice

Audits of the athletic programs for 10 Louisiana universities have revealed that collectively, the schools accumulated nearly $40 million in operating deficits that had to be made up from other sources, primarily from direct institutional support.

University of Louisiana-Lafayette (ULL) had the largest operating deficit while Southern University in Baton Rouge had the lowest, the audits, conducted for the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA), showed.

All the audits but Southern’s were issued in 2026 and were for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2025, and reflected a shortfall of $164,230. Still, however, the Baton Rouge university found it necessary to provide $2.5 million in direct institutional support. Southern’s audit, however, was released in early 2018 and was for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2017.

ULL’s operating deficit was nearly $13.3 million. Its audit showed that all sports generated only $1.9 million in ticket sales, $16.5 million in direct institutional support and total revenue from all sources of $33.1 million against total expenses of $46.4 million for a net operating deficit of $13.3 million.

The second most expensive program of the 10 schools was Louisiana Tech University in Ruston with an operating deficit of nearly $11.9 million.

Ticket revenue for Tech included $571,248 for football, $147,295 for men’s basketball, $38,028 for women’s basketball, $351,007 for all other sports. The school provided direct institutional support of $2.86 million for football, $799,000 for men’s basketball, $849,000 for women’s basketball, $3.4 million for all other supports and $17,554 for non-program specific support for a total of $7.9 million in direct supplemental support. Indirect institutional non-program specific support in the form of athletic facilities debt service accounted for another $2.7 million.

Additionally, Tech received $2 million in football guarantees from playing schools like LSU, $75,000 in men’s basketball guarantees, $55,000 in women’s basketball guarantees and $18,000 in guarantees for all other sports.

Operating deficits for other schools included $5.1 million for Grambling State University, $2.9 million for Southeastern Louisiana University in Hammond, $1.6 million for University of Louisiana-Monroe (ULM), $775,000 for McNeese State University in Lake Charles, $316,523 for Nicholls State University in Thibodaux, $260,000 for University of New Orleans, $167,245 for Northwestern State University (NSU) in Natchitoches.

Notes to the audits indicated that universities generally reduced other university expenditures in order to provide direct support to athletics. Indirect institutional support is not included in the individual universities’ budgets. That revenue is calculated specifically for the purposes of the NCAA repot to include indirect support provided to athletics for utilities, insurance, grounds and facilities maintenance, communications and debt service

Scholarships and budget balancing are the main ways athletics programs at Louisiana colleges plan to use their allotments of gambling tax revenue under a new state law, according to The Louisiana Illuminator, but the law doesn’t require disclosure of the precise amounts.. 

The gambling tax fund was created to assist athletic programs in navigating uncertain fiscal times for college athletics, The Illuminator said. The enabling legislation specifically mentions the money cannot be used to fund existing scholarships, but rather to provide new opportunities for students. 

LSU, UL Lafayette, UL Monroe, Louisiana Tech, Grambling, Southern, McNeese, Nicholls, Northwestern State and Southeastern each are allocated about $2 million annually. The law requires that money be used on things that benefit student-athletes, such as scholarships.

An NCAA litigation settlement earmarking up to $20.5 million to student athletes in name, image and likeness (NIL) has thrown some athletic department budgets into turmoil as athletic departments grapple for innovative new ways to generate revenue. Some departments are experimenting with privatization and private equity deals. Other schools are allowing corporate naming rights to their stadiums as a revenue source.

Even LSU, which has long boasted that its athletic department was self-sustaining, has admitted that is no longer the case as officials of the state’s flagship university attempt to find new revenue models.

Last Saturday (Aug. 15) The Guardian featured a story of the poster boy for corruption and greed, Il Duce Trump, WAVING A WASHINGTON POST HEADLINE that proclaimed “Prescription drug prices record sharpest drop in more than 60 years.”

In classic Trumpian fashion, TACO Don tradition, Trump hitched up his Depends and proclaimed the drop in prices was all his doing, failing to mention that the article in reality attributed the decrease to his predecessor, Joe Biden.

It was a staged photo-op and he waved the printout of the headline under the noses of reporters, encouraging the press pool to record and photograph the momentous event for posterity—even though it was not the heralded 1500 percent price decrease he predicted a few months ago (it was actually 3.1 percent for July). “Prescription drug prices down more than at any time over 60 years,” he reiterated. “What else do I have to say?”

Well, what he could have said was the truth, that the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 which required Medicare to negotiate the prices it pays drug companies.

Wait. You mean Medicare could not negotiate prices for drugs the way insurance companies do in the private sector? Why, that’s…that’s outrageous! Why couldn’t that be done?

For that, you can thank former Louisiana Congressman Billy Tauzin who represented Louisiana’s 3^rd congressional district from 1980 to 2005. The Chackbay Chameleon switched from Democrat to Repugnantcan in 1995 when the Repugs won control of congress so as not to lose seniority status and in 2004 chose not to run for reelection.

That decision wasn’t because he faced a threat of defeat. It was a financial decision, pure and simple, and we have higher drug prices for Medicare as a result. Of course, with an inability to negotiate on the part of Medicare had the ripple effect of causing higher insurance premiums as well.

So pay attention here. Like any game, politics included, it’s critical to keep your eye on the ball at all times.

You see, Tauzin was seeing dollar signs–big dollar signs–in his future when he made that 2024 announcement that he would not run again. That’s because he had been offered a cushy job of president and CEO of the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA), beginning the day he left his congressional office in January 2005.

And how did he land such a powerful job? Why, in 2002, while still in office, he was appointed chairman of the House Energy & Commerce Committee which had—and has—jurisdiction over the drug industry and in 2004, his final year in office, he SPEARHEADED a Medicare prescription drug bill (coincidentally drafted by drug industry lobbyists) which prohibited Medicare from negotiating bulk discounts with drug companies. BINGO! Instant profiteering by Bib PhRMA! Would love to have seen the stock quotes for drug companies the day that measure passed.

The new law made the U.S. the only developed country whose legislative body voted to subject its citizens to unprotected increases, making medications ranging from moderate to life-saving unaffordable to some American, as much as 2.4 times higher than the average price of nine other developed countries. It is also why other counties enjoy vastly reduced bulk prices.

I’m sure there was no connection to be made but prior to being named chairman of the Energy and Commerce Committee, Tauzin’s total contributions to his campaigns by the drug lobby was $5,000. After his appointment, he received $91,000 from drug companies—and, apparently, free travel  

Page 6 of Tauzin’s 2003 financial report shows that PhRMA flew him from Washinton, D.C. to Naples, Florida, on March 27 of that year and back to Washington three days later, on March 30. Less than two years later, he was CEO of the organization.

So, bottom line, Tauzin, whose congressional salary was $154,000, turned his back on Medicare recipients (read: the elderly) to take a lobbying job that paid him $2 million a year.

And while the Inflation Reduction Act that reinstated negotiations was expected to reduce the annual federal deficit by as much as $25 billion, there were, as usual, the back-door political deals.

With the assistance of another Louisiana congressman, Speaker Mike Johnson, the House in July 2025 passed the Repugnantcan policy bill that handed Big PhRMA a hefty $5 billion bonus by allowing more medications to be exempt from Medicare’s price negotiation program

According to Rebecca Robins, writing for The New York Times, under existing law, expensive drugs are exempt from price negotiations if they are approved to treat a single rare disease that affects fewer than 200,000 patients. Drugmakers, in a somewhat convoluted argument, have maintained that the negotiation requirement discourages the conducting of studies and seeking approval to treat a second rare disease, and that it ultimately deprives patients of new treatments.

In response, the new bill spares drugs that are approved to treat multiple rare diseases. They can still be subject to price negotiations later if they are approved for larger groups of patients, though the exemption delays those reduced prices.

Meanwhile, Trump attempts to again take credit for something positive accomplished by one of his predecessors. He’s done it with Obama and now he’s doing it with a Biden-passed bill.

In military parlance, that’s similar to stolen valor on the part of Cadet Bonespurs.