A coalition of conservative state and national organizations, led by Mississippi Center for Public Policy, recently sent a letter to Gov. Phil Bryant in support of the Fresh Start Act.
The Fresh Start Act, Senate Bill 2871, will make it easier for ex-offenders to receive occupational licenses and earn a living.
"Employment is a vital part of reintegrating ex-offenders into their families and communities. Work is the key to staying out of prison and off of welfare. Work is an essential part of the 'success sequence' that is the pathway to prosperity in America. Studies show work reduces recidivism," the letter writes.
Under the proposed legislation, licensing authorities would no longer be able to use vague terms like “moral turpitude” or “good character” to deny a license.
Rather, they must use a “clear and convincing standard of proof” in determining whether a criminal conviction is cause to be denied a license. This includes nature and seriousness of the crime, passage of time since the conviction, relationship of the crime to the responsibilities of the occupation, and evidence of rehabilitation on the part of the individual.
An individual may request a determination from the licensing authority on whether their criminal record will be disqualifying. If an individual is denied, the board must state the grounds and reasons for the denial. The individual would then have the right to a hearing to challenge the decision, with the burden of proof on the licensing authority.
"This bill provides a unique opportunity to bring a message of hope to the thousands of Mississippians released from prison each year. Their hope is that it’s not too latefor them. Their hope is that they, too, can share in the American dream. Thanks to the leadership of Lt. Governor Tate Reeves, Speaker Philip Gunn, Senator John Polk and Rep. Mark Baker, this legislation would create a 'Fresh Start' for these ex- offenders."
The letter was signed by Mississippi Center for Public Policy, Americans for Tax Reform, American Conservative Union, Americans for Prosperity- Mississippi, Right on Crime, Empower Mississippi, and Foundation for Government Accountability.
Read the full letter here.
If you’ve gambled at a Mississippi casino at a dealer-served game or gotten a drink served by a bartender, your tax dollars probably contributed heavily to their education.
According to a report by non-partisan fiscal transparency group Open the Books, the Crescent City School of Gaming and Bartending — with campuses in Biloxi, Las Vegas, Memphis and New Orleans —received $9.5 million in funding from the U.S. Department of Education from 2014 to 2017.
The school offers a three-week bartending course, a 12-week beverage management course, and its gaming department trains potential dealers in blackjack, roulette, poker, baccarat and craps.
Mississippi as a state, according to the report, received $1.6 billion from the Department of Education in fiscal 2017, which included $241 million in direct payments, $480 million in grants and $912 million in loans.
California received the most, with $18.5 billion, followed by Texas ($12.5 billion), New York ($11.9 billion) and Florida ($9.49 billion).
The U.S. Department of Education spent $115 billion last year, with $5.9 billion going to the 25 colleges and universities with the largest endowments (a combined quarter trillion in existing endowments).
This included $2.3 billion in student loans in fiscal 2015 to 2016 and $1.2 billion in fiscal 2017 to 2018.
The Department of Education admitted that overpayments accounted for $11 billion of the money spent on funding higher education, with $7.1 billion in overpayments on direct loans and $4.1 billion as Pell Grants.
The Crescent City School of Gaming and Bartending wasn’t the only non-traditional school to receive money from the Department of Education. A school for video game development education, the DigiPen Institute of Technology, received $51.4 million from fiscal years 2014 to 2017.
The Professional Golfers Career College received $4.5 million between fiscal years 2014 to 2017 and the school teaches golf shop operations, methods of golf instruction, golf rules, and course management.
The Department of Education also paid $74.2 million from fiscal years 2014 to 2017 to the American Musical and Dramatic Academy, $43.5 million during that same time period to the a fashion college called the Laboratory Institute of Merchandising, and $10.4 million to a gunsmithing college called the Sonoran Desert Institute.
The 50 lowest-performing community colleges received $923.5 million in federal student loans and grants. Ten of these schools had an average graduation rate of 12 percent.
According to the report, for-profit colleges received $10.5 billion in fiscal 2017, with 10 of these schools receiving 30 percent of the funding, which included grants, direct payments, contracts and student loans.
Seminaries received $815 million from fiscal 2014 to 2017.
Giving Mississippi public school teachers a pay hike greater than the one passed by the legislature and spending vastly more on K-12 education would hit the state’s budget with a $385 million hammer blow.
The Republican-led legislature passed a teacher pay raise in the final days of the session that will increase teacher pay by $1,500 will cost $58 million annually. House Speaker Philip Gunn said Monday that the legislature is committed to appropriating that amount annually to cover it and that it isn’t a one-time pay hike.
Mississippi teachers have the nation’s lowest average salary ($44,926), but when cost of living numbers utilized by the North Carolina-based John Locke Foundation are used, the state’s teacher salaries now rank 35th nationally and 34thafter the pay hike takes effect.
Analyzing data shows that the $4,000 raise sought by Democrats during the final days of the session would cost $154 million annually. Adjusting the average ($49,574) for cost of living after this hypothetical $4,000 raise would move Mississippi up to 26th nationally.
Even with a $4,000 pay hike, the cost-adjusted average salary for Mississippi teachers would still trail Georgia, Tennessee, North Carolina, Arkansas and Alabama in the southeast region.
That’s not all that public education advocates claim that the state needs. They seek a massive salary increase for teachers and “full funding” for K-12 education under the Mississippi Adequate Education formula.
Increasing the general fund K-12 education budget to the amount dictated by MAEP ($2.477 billion) would add up to about $231 million. Combined with the money required for a $4,000 teacher pay raise and the bill would add up to $385 million.
This increase would be as much as the state’s debt service ($385 million) and more than the entire budgets for:
- The Department of Corrections ($316 million)
- Community colleges ($148 million)
- The state Department of Mental Health ($213 million)
The complex MAEP formula is designed to increase every year despite declining enrollment in Mississippi public schools.
It also doesn’t include some education programs or revenue from the state’s sales tax deposited in the Education Enhancement Fund ($299 million in fiscal 2018, with $214 million going to K-12) that is split between K-12, community colleges and universities.
Thanks to a state Supreme Court decision in 2017, the MAEP is no more than a funding request for the state’s public schools by the state Department of Education. The legislature isn’t compelled to follow its funding guidelines when appropriating for K-12 education.
Private citizens should not be subjected to government harassment for supporting causes they believe in, and charities should not have to worry about their funding drying up because donors fear reprisals.
Yet many policy pundits on the left, and even a few on the right, have been doing all they can to convince lawmakers across the country that the government has a compelling interest in knowing to whom you give your after-tax money. In using popular language such as “dark money” and “transparency,” the Left really means that it wants to know who funds its opposition, so it can bring pressure to bear and suppress its opponents’ speech with coercion and threats.
It’s no surprise that in blue states, including California, New York, Delaware, and New Mexico, the government is compelling 501(c) charities to disclose information about their donors. In recent years, some red states, too, including South Dakota, Utah, Alabama, and South Carolina, have also proposed legislation or regulation that would strip away donor privacy for charitable organizations, in the name of good government.
While transparency is what citizens require of their government, privacy is the constitutional right afforded to citizens. Conflating public requirements and private rights is clever but disingenuous. We should not allow proponents, from the Left or the Right, to get away with such sophistry.
In the Federalist Papers, a collection of 85 essays promoting the adoption of the United States Constitution, written by Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay in 1787–88, the three founders used the pseudonym “Publius.” They did so because to advocate for something as radical and controversial as that revolutionary document was dangerous. Not everyone in power in 18th-century America agreed with these ideas.
The same was true of the supporters of the NAACP in the 1950s, when it was advocating for equal rights for every American. During those tumultuous times, many people of public influence and power were demanding to know the names of members or supporters of the NAACP. In NAACP v. Alabama (1958), Justice John Harlan II outlined the practical effects of compelling organizations to disclose their donor lists: It exposed them to “economic reprisals, loss of employment, threat of physical coercion, and other manifestations of physical hostilities.”
Now imagine a person today who loses his job when his climate-zealot boss finds out that he gives money to a charity that opposes the Green New Deal. Or imagine the symphony director in a major city who is publicly shamed and harassed because he dared give to a charity that supports requiring people to use the public restroom that corresponds with their biological sex. Or how about an actual case in California, where the director of the Los Angeles Film Festival was forced to resign because he supported Proposition 8, the controversial rejection of same-sex marriage. California has been a proponent of forced disclosure of donor information for years, claiming that the information would be safe in the state’s hands. Yet Kamala Harris, the former California attorney general and now a U.S. senator and presidential hopeful, “inadvertently” allowed the names of donors to roughly 1,700 non-profits to be posted on a government website.
Nadine Strossen, a New York University law professor and former president of the American Civil Liberties Union, is a strong advocate of donor privacy. “Individuals should be able to join and support organizations without having their names and other private information disclosed,” she argues. “These rights remain essential today for the ongoing advocacy of civil-society groups across the ideological spectrum.
Mississippi, where I live and work, has now become the second state, joining Arizona, to protect the privacy of non-profit donors. Governor Phil Bryant signed House Bill 1205 into law at the close of the legislative session last month. The bill codifies a long-standing practice of barring the government from demanding or releasing publicly the personal information of donors to 501(c) non-profits. At a time when partisanship seems to reign, the publication of personal information can expose citizens to intimidation and harassment from those who want to shut down speech with which they disagree. Fortunately, two states — and may others follow — have taken steps to ensure the fundamental American right of donor privacy.
“In recent years, charitable donations have been weaponized by certain groups against individuals to punish donors whose political beliefs differ from their own,” Governor Bryant said at the signing of the bill. “I was pleased to sign HB 1205, which protects free-speech rights of Mississippians who make charitable donations.” Let’s hope more governors and state legislatures follow suit.
This column appeared in National Review on April 9, 2019.
Attendance at the taxpayer-funded MGM Park in Biloxi has decreased every year since the minor league Shuckers’ abbreviated inaugural season in 2015.
Those numbers aren’t even close to those predicted when the ballpark was proposed.
In 2018, the Shuckers had 160,364 fans through the turnstiles, an average of 2,259 per game. The team ranked seventh in the Southern League in average attendance. League averages that year were 226,183 fans and 3,388 per contest.
That’s not what a feasibility study commissioned in 2013 by the city of Biloxi predicted. The $25,000 study said the stadium would draw 280,000 fans annually, or about 4,117 per game. Those numbers would’ve put the Shuckers in the top five in the league in attendance.
The Biloxi Shuckers are the Class AA affiliate of the Milwaukee Brewers and they play in the 10-team Southern League, which includes teams in Pearl (Mississippi Braves); Birmingham; Chattanooga; Mobile; Pensacola; Seiverville, Tennessee; Jackson, Tennessee; Jacksonville and Montgomery, Alabama.
Those numbers are down from 2017, when the Shuckers drew 167,151 fans or 2,572 per game. That was good for eighth in attendance in the league, which averaged 3,684 fans per game.
Biloxi drew 180,384 fans in 2016, an average of 2,692 fans that put them eighth in average attendance. The league averages were 232,587 fans total and 3,445 per game that year.
In a 22-game home season in 2015, the Shuckers drew 3,252 fans to MGM Park. The team had to split time with its old ballpark in Huntsville, Alabama while its new home was still under construction.
The city of Biloxi borrowed $21 million to help build the $36 million stadium, which was also funded with BP settlement money and tourism rebate money from a state program. The team was lured from Huntsville, Alabama after playing in front of sparse crowds for years at what was the oldest stadium in the league.
Biloxi Baseball LLC could also receive up to $6 million from the state from the Tourism Rebate program. The state also provided $15 million in money from the BP settlement to help build the park.
Not all feasibility studies are created equal. The one for Birmingham’s Regions Field, which opened in 2013 and cost $64 million, predicted the ballpark would draw 255,300 fans in the first year and 240,800 in the fifth year.
The ballpark — which is located in downtown Birmingham — has outstripped those estimates, drawing a league-leading 391,061 fans in 2018 and 391,725 in 2017.
Total league attendance increased slightly in 2018 (2,261,834) from 2017 (2,171,934), but is still down from a nine-year high in 2014 of 2,367,710. Three teams — Pensacola, Birmingham and Biloxi — have built new ballparks during that time.
A fourth new stadium in Madison, Alabama near Huntsville will be the new home of the Mobile Baybears, who are relocating and changing their name to the Rocket City Trash Pandas. The new stadium will cost Madison taxpayers $46 million.
A feasibility study there predicts the team will draw 400,000 spectators in the first year and level off at an average of 350,000, which would put the team second to Birmingham in annual attendance.
Unplanned, released in a limited number of theaters across the nation in March, tells the story of Abby Johnson’s conversion from a Planned Parenthood Clinic Director to a pro-life activist.
The movie came in 4th place in box office sales over opening weekend, doubling expected ticket sales, and earning over $6 million three days after its release. This unexpected success is accompanied by controversy and apparent censorship of an impactful Christian and pro-life story.
This is exactly why we should be paying attention.
Since its release, the movie has dealt with extensive censorship issues on social media. Twitter briefly suspended the movie’s account. Though it was restored, due to public outcry, this act of censorship leaves us with questions. Was it an executive decision, made by Twitter? Was it caused by a reaction from complaints by pro-choice users? Twitter claims that they suspended the account because it was linked to an account that violated the website’s rules. Is this vague claim true? The movie’s account also suffered a quick and drastic decrease in followers, which is also entirely unexplained.
It appears as if discussion and promotion of the movie is being intentionally suppressed by mainstream media. Furthermore, it appears as if the nature of this censorship is political.
Similarly, the R rating, given by the Motion Picture Association of America, was also politically controversial. Unplanned was likely the first Christian movie, produced by Pure Flix, to receive an R rating. It did not contain nudity, sexuality, or foul language. Did the movie deserve the rating that it received, or could it have been another attempt at censorship of conservative Christian voices by mainstream media?
Candidly, the movie graphically detailed surgical abortions, a chemical abortion, and the aftermath of a botched abortion. These scenes portrayed the ugly reality and the haunting violence of abortion. The R rating could serve as warning for parents who may not want their children to witness such images, or post-abortive women who may be disturbed by such images.
However, it is reasonable to ask why a 13-year-old girl is legally permitted to obtain an abortion without parental consent (depending on the state) but not permitted to watch a movie about abortion? Deserving or not, the R rating successfully reduced the number of teenagers that a pro-life message could reach. It also prevented advertisement of the film on most major cable networks.
The various censorship efforts by mainstream media demonstrate why we need to pay attention to discussion surrounding the movie and why we need to watch the film for ourselves.
Unplanned changes the stigmas and the generalizations typically attached to Christian-made movies. Often, Christian films, even high grossing movies such as Gods not Dead, written by the same screenwriters as Unplanned, are painfully predictable, naïve, and one-sided. Christian-made movies often tend to self-righteously “candy-coat” issues and remain blissfully ignorant to ugly realities – as if they are scared to touch anything that may actually represent the gospel of a savior that ate with tax collectors or prostitutes. It is as if they are afraid to acknowledge our call to live in the world.
Unplanned changes these stigmas in a remarkable manner. The power of storytelling is immeasurable. Telling a story truthfully is an act of bravery. Abby Johnson tells her story without reservation and it is a difficult story to hear. It is not a story that is blind to ugly realities. The abortion scenes are heart-wrenching and she highlights well the paralyzing hopelessness that women experience when facing a crisis pregnancy.
It is not a one-sided story. Viewers of the film will witness difficult truths, such as the fact that women who work for abortion clinics are rarely ill-intentioned. They truly believe that they are serving and helping other women.. They are not malicious adherents to the manipulative nature of the Planned Parenthood corporation and they do not revel in the death of an unborn baby. I believe they are simply misguided, as Abby Johnson tells us that she was for many years. Likewise, pro-lifers do not always practice love, nor do they always truly want to help women in crisis. Instead, they scream slurs and label women “baby-murders.” They hold up signs of aborted fetuses and utilize scare tactics. Like most things in life, there is more gray than black and white.
This point was made clearly in the distinction made between 40 Days for Life, a non-profit organization dedicated to quietly praying outside of abortion clinics and offering women the hope of another option, and the people dressed as grim reapers who harassed women as they walked into the clinic. The film does not naively believe that the divide between the pro-life vs. pro-choice debate is consistently black and white.
Another case often brought against Christian-themed films is their tendency to preach to the choir. Ideally, Unplanned will open thousands of eyes and reach just as many hearts. Ideally, it will create dynamic and edifying conversations between the two sides of the pro-life vs. pro-choice fence. I believe that it has the potential to accomplish all of this and more – especially because of its timely release. The current political atmosphere surrounding the issue of abortion is volatile. Heartbeat bills are being passed in numerous states, as well as born alive acts and late-term abortion laws.
Yet, what if the film only reaches conservative Christians? Is it then a waste of money? Would it then be a waste of a powerful story, told bravely? This is not the case. In my experience, conservative Christians may know what abortion is, the basic definition of terminating a pregnancy, and they may vote for politicians who uphold the sanctity of life, but they may not know what abortion means.
Most conservatives have not have witnessed the violence of abortion. They may not know that abortion is a violation of women’s rights. They may not know how difficult abortion is, both physically and emotionally. Conservatives may not understand the cold and manipulative nature of the abortion industry. They may not have heard the heartbeat of an unborn child. Conservatives may not have faced the reality of an unplanned pregnancy. They may not know that fetal parts are removed from abortion clinics in industrial-sized, blue barrels. Conservatives may not have witnessed a mother mourning a child she has never even met. There are so many people who do not know what abortion means. Just because abortion is a controversial and contentious issue does not indicate that the majority of people are well-informed, including conservative Christians.
Go and watch Unplanned. Go and appreciate the power of storytelling and the honesty of one Christian film. Go and learn what abortion really means. Go and support liberties such as freedom of speech and freedom of religion.
House Speaker Philip Gunn said Monday that the best accomplishments of the legislature this session included criminal justice reform, rural broadband, and human trafficking legislation.
He also doesn’t favor expanding Medicaid and also mentioned that the next legislature will have a tough task ahead when it redraws the state’s legislative districts after the 2020 U.S. Census.
Gunn made the remarks at the Stennis Capitol Press Forum about the session, which ended March 29.
Louisiana and Arkansas have expanded Medicaid for able-bodied adults under the Affordable Care Act, but Gunn said that such a decision should be left to the next legislature.
“I think under the current leadership, you’re not going to see any appetite for that,” Gunn said. “The big concern is the unknown. Once you give a benefit, you can’t take it back. The federal government can tomorrow, they withdraw their support and they can change the rules. More than that, I don’t think there is any appetite for that in the state.
“Until the taxpayers rise up and say we want this, there is not going to be an appetite for this.”
One example that wasn’t cited by Gunn was Louisiana. The Pelican State expanded Medicaid in 2016 under Gov. John Bel Edwards, a Democrat. Projections by Edwards’ administration said that 306,000 new people would enroll.
This year, those numbers have climbed to 505,503, an increase of 65.2 percent.
Gunn said he was pleased that the legislature was able to pass another criminal justice reform package. The new law passed this year has several important components, including allowing the expungement of non-violent felonies, expanding the definition of intervention courts, screening for mental health for offenders to keep them out of the criminal justice system, and ending the practice of suspending driver’s licenses for the non-payment of fines or non-appearance in court.
Gunn said that the broadband bill, which allows rural electric power associations, also known as co-ops, to offer this service to customers was designed to not favor either the EPAs or established service providers such as Comcast, CSpire, and AT&T.
He said one other debate was whether to allow the EPAs, which are non-profits with tax advantages, to be able to compete against established providers with no tax advantages in profitable service areas, such as suburbs. The law requires EPAs to only be able to provide broadband service within their certificated area.
He cited the pole attachment fee — which a broadband provider or telephone company pays to a utility to attach their lines to their power poles — as one way the law didn’t favor one side or the other. In the new law, EPAs are required to charge the same pole attachment fee for either their broadband affiliate or an outside operator.
Gunn said the human trafficking legislation was designed to run the practice out of the state and he said the next step is to help victims get back on the right path.
The new law, which was signed by Gov. Phil Bryant, increases the definition for prostitution to age 18 and adds training for EMTs, firefighters, and others. He said this change to the prostitution law is to ensure that those ensnared in a ring can seek help from law enforcement without worrying about prosecution.