January 14, 2017 MCPP Priorities The 2017 Mississippi legislative session began on January 3, and the Mississippi Center for Public Policy will keep you updated throughout the session. We believe legislation should eliminate unnecessary barriers so that opportunities can be created that will benefit all Mississippians. We’re focused on four main principles - economic freedom, education freedom, individual responsibility, and government accountability. Economic Freedom We want Mississippi to be a place where entrepreneurs are free to pursue their dreams, which means we must have a competitive economic environment based on free-market principles. Unnecessarily burdensome laws and regulations that hinder economic opportunity should be removed, and we must improve the business community’s ability to create and promote opportunity. Education Freedom We believe every child in Mississippi should have access to high-quality education. Parents should have the opportunity to choose the education that works best for their children. We need improved education content at all levels. Individual Responsibility We want Mississippians to experience freedom from dependence on government for their daily needs. We support policies that promote personal responsibility and strong families. Government Accountability Government should function according to the principles that enhance freedom and responsibility. We believe in restraining the growth of state government when it attempts to move beyond its proper role. We promote wise stewardship of tax dollars and a fair tax policy that collects only what is necessary. For more about the principles we believe, read (or listen to) our booklet Governing by Principle: Ten Principles to Guide Public Policy?) 2017 Legislative Session Agenda Consistent with those principles, here are just a few of the many ideas we are promoting: * legislation to significantly reduce welfare fraud by removing dead people and non-Mississippi residents from Medicaid and other programs; * a bill to require the U.S. History test that is required for high school graduation to include questions on America’s Founding (it currently covers only 1870 to the present); * bills to help us recover from the negative effects of Obamacare at the state level; and * a variety of bills aimed at reducing the regulatory burden on employers so that more private sector jobs can be created. In addition, we will be monitoring many other bills, and acting when necessary to encourage their passage or their defeat. All our decisions will be driven by the principles described above, and even more specifically, according to the principles we have written about in Governing by Principle.   Legislative Action Only a few bills have begun to make their way through the legislative process. About 1,200 bills have been introduced and assigned to committees. By the end of the session, more than 3,000 bills will have been introduced. Based on prior years’ experience, more than two-thirds of those bills will see no action at all. About 350 bills will be signed into law, including about 100 Appropriations bills and a good number of bills that do no more than give names to bridges or buildings. The deadline for introducing most bills is this coming Monday, Jan. 16. (Bills that take your money and spend your money, known as Revenue and Appropriations bills, have a late February deadline.) The House has approved a few bills so far, and the Senate has approved one of them. Here are a few that are significant: School Superintendents HB 32, the first bill to make it through the legislature and to the governor’s desk, is a bill to clarify the law passed last year to require school district superintendents to be appointed rather than elected, beginning in 2019. This bill clarifies that if a currently-elected superintendent’s office becomes vacant before 2019, the school board is to go ahead and appoint a superintendent, not hold a special election. The governor is expected to sign the bill. Campaign Finance HB 479, billed as campaign finance “reform,” defines and outlines usage guidelines for campaign contributions by any elected official or candidate. The bill prohibits the personal use of campaign contributions and provides acceptable options for how to use leftover money at the conclusion of an elected official or candidate’s service or campaign. Enforcement would be overseen by the Mississippi Ethics Commission. The bill passed by a vote of 102-13 and now goes to the Senate. Auto Liability Insurance HB 319 would require drivers to show proof of auto liability insurance to renew their registration (which most people think of as renewing their car tag, or getting their annual car tag sticker). This bill passed the House 82-33 and now goes to the Senate. Tax Liability HB 131 would authorize the Department of Revenue to compromise and settle a tax liability that is a doubtful claim. Our state constitution prohibits forgiving a tax debt to the state, no matter how unrealistic its full collection. Proponents of this bill say that if some type of compromise could be allowed, the state would get some money (instead of none), and the taxpayer could begin to rebuild financially. The bill passed without opposition and now goes to the Senate.

Today, we celebrate the one year anniversary of the birth of the Mississippi Justice Institute. One Year Ago Today, we celebrate the one year anniversary of the birth of the Mississippi Justice Institute. We created MJI on February 1, 2016, as a division of the Mississippi Center for Public Policy with its purpose to fight for and defend the Constitutional rights of all Mississippians! In just 365 days, we have been able to do more than many of our counterparts around the country. Defending Religious Freedom When threatened with a lawsuit from an out-of-state atheist group, we stood up for a local school district and high school football coach who dared to practice his faith with football players during their own time and away from school grounds.Details Here Pursuing the American Dream We have fought for the right of taxi cab drivers who don't want a handout but simply want an opportunity to start their own small business and live the American dream, but are prevented from doing so by outdated, anti-competitive local regulations.Details Here Fighting for Parents & Students We continue to fight for parents of children who are attending charter public schools, who just want the right to escape failing schools, have a choice in deciding what is best for their children and receive a quality education.Details Here Advocating for Government Transparency And finally we are fighting for transparency in government, representing local folks who want their government to simply follow the law and conduct public meetings openly. We're fighting for transparency with cases in Columbus and Lauderdale County.Details Here And Here You Can Join The Fight It's no coincidence that the Mississippi Justice Institute was founded on National Freedom Day because every day we at MJI are looking to protect the freedom, liberty and independence that we were granted by our Creator.We're proud to be the legal arm of the Mississippi Center for Public Policy fighting for you. Join us in this fight. Contact us with cases, make a tax-deductible contribution to our cause, and refer our services to others. It is only through cooperation and collaboration with other Freedom Fighters like you that we will be victorious as we seek justice for all. Thank you. Mike Hurst Director, Mississippi Justice Institute Mike Hurst  | Mississippi Justice Institute | (601) 969-1300 | [email protected] | msjustice.org STAY CONNECTED:

 

Legislative Update - February 6, 2017

This Thursday is the deadline for the House and Senate to pass bills that were approved by their own committees. The exception to that are bills that take your money and spend your money, otherwise known as Appropriations and Revenue bills. That deadline comes later this month.

Although bills died that would have made blue the official state color, classified venomous snakes as inherently dangerous to humans, required contracts to be written in large print, require a "probable cause" hearing for legislators who are arrested, and require school districts to serve low-fat meals and snacks to students diagnosed as overweight, there are still plenty of bills still alive.

Out of 2,300 bills that were introduced to change or create state laws (called “general bills”), 91% of them died in committee, leaving 429 to consider. Many of those are duplicate or similar bills in the House and Senate, and many are to simply extend current laws that would otherwise expire this year.

Below are significant bills that are still alive. If you click on the bill number, it will take you to the legislature’s status page for that bill, where you can read the original and current versions, and if it has been voted on in the full House or Senate, you can see who voted for or against it.

IMPORTANT NOTE: Listing of the bills below should NOT be taken as our endorsement of them. To the contrary, there are some horrible bills that somehow made it out of committees with generally conservative majorities.

By Forest Thigpen

To hear this commentary click here.

Governor Bryant is drawing some criticism for saying he was driven by his Christian faith to sign a particular law. Let's think about that.

All public officials have a reason for the position they take on a piece of legislation. In some cases, it's a desire to be re-elected; in other cases, they might want to reflect the majority of constituents they've heard from. But often, their votes are driven by a philosophy or ideology that reflects their understanding of the purpose of government.

The reality is that such a philosophy or ideology has been influenced by someone else. Maybe a professor in college, or a favorite philosopher or writer. Bernie Sanders, as a self-proclaimed socialist, presumably was influenced by the writings of Karl Marx.

The idea that being motivated by faith is a violation of the constitutional separation of church and state reflects a significant misunderstanding of that concept, which is a subject for another time. But today's question comes down to this: Why would it be constitutional to be influenced by Karl Marx but not by Jesus Christ?

For more on this and other principles of governing, go to GoverningByPrinciple.org.

January 18, 2017 Sheriff’s Office Took the Furniture: Mississippi's Asset Forfeiture Laws "It was the first time in Mississippi attorney Richard Rehfeldt's long career that he can remember where police seized a client's furniture," writes C.J. Ciaramella at Reason Foundation’s "Hit & Run" Blog. "In 2012, Rehfeldt says, the Hinds County Sheriff's Office raided his client's apartment on suspicion her boyfriend was a drug dealer. Anything purchased with drug proceeds is fair game to be seized by police under civil asset forfeiture laws, and they determined the boyfriend had furnished the apartment, so off went her TV, her table and chairs, her couch, her lamps, and even the pictures on the wall. Under a settlement agreement, all of it was eventually returned. Well, all of it except the couch. The Institute for Justice gives Mississippi a C- grade for its asset forfeiture laws, noting the low burden of proof required for a seizure and the high amount of revenue that goes straight back into law enforcement budgets." Source: Reason.com Read the Article Federal Agencies Approve 18 Rules for Every Law Congress Passes In 2016, Congress passed “only” 211 Public Laws, according to Wayne Crews of the Competitive Enterprise Institute. But he says the bureaucracy was much busier, issuing 3,853 rules and regulations - 443 more than last year – which were published in a record-setting 97,110 pages of the Federal Register. That translated into an average of 18 rules and regulations for every law Congress passed. Crews calls that multiple The Unconstitutionality Index - the multiple of unelected agency rules, over the number of laws from our elected Congress. Source: Competitive Enterprise Institute Read the Article Take the Bill of Rights Quiz! It has been 225 years since the Bill of Rights became part of the U.S. Constitution on December 15, 1791. How much do you know about it? This quiz, from the Ashbrook Center at Ashland University in Ohio, provides an opportunity for you to test and refresh your knowledge of the signing and adoption of the Bill of Rights, which comprises the first ten Amendments to the Constitution. Source: Ashbrook Center at Ashland University Take the Quiz School Choice Liberty Luncheon Jan. 24 with Kevin Chavous The Mississippi Center for Public Policy is providing an opportunity for you to hear from one of the leading school choice advocates in the nation about how school choice has changed the lives of thousands of children in the inner city of Washington D.C. and around the country. Kevin Chavous is a noted author, attorney, national education reform leader, and as of 2016, a member of the District of Columbia Hall of Fame. As a D.C. City Council Member from 1993-2005, Mr. Chavous helped to shepherd the charter school movement into the nation's capital. Other options for low-income children have expanded under his leadership, including the D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program, the first federal scholarship program, which has provided access to private schools for nearly 6,000 children from low-income families since its inception. Mr. Chavous worked with U.S. Education Secretary-designate Betsy DeVos to form American Federation for Children, a leading school choice organization. He will be speaking on January 24, during National School Choice Week, at the Old Capitol Inn in Jackson from 11:30 AM to 1:00 PM. The cost is $15. Click here for more information or to register. Preceding that event, you are invited to attend the National School Choice Week rally at the State Capitol from 9:30 – 10:00 AM. Source: Mississippi Center for Public Policy For more details, click here.   Follow on Twitter | Like on Facebook | Visit mspolicy.org   520 George St., Jackson, MS 39202 | Copyright 2014 | All rights reserved

Air Date: August 8, 2016

Listen Here

What do you think would happen in our society if we treated people with respect when we disagree
with them politically? Instead of name-calling, which is common on social media, or saying their disagreement with us is driven by hatred, what if we actually listened to them to find out why they believe what they believe?

I'll take it a step further. What if we were to accept those people as they are, and even accept their viewpoint? I don't mean we adopt their viewpoint as our own, or approve of their behaviors or their beliefs. Acceptance does not mean approval.

Accepting others is like finding them on a map. Where they're going, or what they want to do with their beliefs is important, but accepting the reality of where they are right now, and how they got there, is an important starting point for a productive discussion.

Whether it's a political disagreement, or disagreement with a spouse or anyone else for that matter, if we listen before we speak, we might be surprised to find ways we can work together to solve some of our biggest problems.

President Trump signs ACA executive order Administration will need legislation or personnel change to effect reform President Donald Trump will need legislation or to change personnel if it wants its new executive order on the Affordable Care Act (aka Obamacare) to make a significant policy change. That's according to Mississippi Attorney Pepper Crutcher who writes at the "Affordable Care Act Review," an insightful resource for anyone wanting to keep up with the ACA requirements or reform. Crutcher writes, "Perhaps President Trump hopes by this Order to induce current DOL, IRS and HHS staff to delay and relax already overdue ACA enforcement efforts.  But this Order does not command any waiver, delay, relaxation or other, particular, sub-regulatory guidance, which means, practically speaking, that the new President is asking the former President's appointees to cooperate to undo years of their work.  We expect few volunteers. If that's a good guess, then the new Administration will need legislation, or personnel change, or both, to effect significant policy change." Source: Affordable Care Act Review

Save Our Schools Watch the Video - Sign the Petition Charter schools in Mississippi are changing lives and this video tells some of the stories. But a lawsuit threatens to close charter schools and force children back into schools that were not meeting their needs. The Save Our Schools coalition is made up of students, parents, teachers, and concerned citizens who want children in Jackson, Mississippi to have access to high quality public charter schools. Watch the video and visit the Save Our Schools website to sign the petition to keep charter schools open. Charter School Families Tell Their Stories Source: SaveOurSchools.org

Mississippi earns "F" in forfeiture National study says state lacks transparency   Mississippi received an "F" on 36 metrics and an "incomplete on one metric for forfeiture transparency and accountability. That grade comes from a recently released report by the Institute for Justice. From the report: "Every year, local, state and federal law enforcement agencies across the United States seize and keep billions of dollars in cash, cars, homes and other property using a legal tool called forfeiture. With civil forfeiture, police and prosecutors can typically seize property on the mere suspicion it was involved in a crime. Most often, no charges or convictions are ever required to permanently deprive people of their property. Most of this forfeiture activity happens with little legislative or public oversight. So does most spending from forfeiture funds." Read the full report here. Source: Institute for Justice

The "Mother, May I" Government Federal bureaucracies "guidance" avoids oversight Federal agencies use "guidance" to dictate policy that is not approved by Congress or even promulgated through the Administrative Procedure Act which requires review, input and advance public notice. Clyde Wayne Crews writes when bureaucrats make up the rules as they go along, it puts citizens and businesses in a "Mother, May I" society, unsure of what can or cannot be done. Read his perspective here. Source: The Cato Institute

Obamacare promises largely unmet Healthcare costs have increased; options have decreased The promises and projections of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) have been largely unmet. Christopher Holt and Juliana Darrow write at the American Action Forum, "We were promised that we could keep our insurance plan, but at least 4.7 million people lost their plans when the law went into effect. We were promised we could keep our doctors, but the proliferation of narrow network plans has made that another false promise. We were promised the typical family would see their insurance premiums reduced by as much as $2,500. The reality is that since 2014, average premiums for exchange benchmark plans have increased by 37.1 percent. We were told that the ACA would 'bend the cost curve and start actually reducing health care costs', but it hasn't happened either. In the year prior to Obamacare's passage, health care spending grew at 4 percent, but in 2015, the second year of full implementation, it increased by 5.8 percent." Source: American Action Forum "Obamacare: Promises Versus Reality"

Download the PDF of the Letter

October 27, 2016

Dr. Virginia Young, Superintendent
Newton Municipal School District
205 School Street
Newton, MS 39345

RE: Constitutional Right to Freedom of Religion

Dear Dr. Young:

My name is Mike Hurst and I am the Director of the Mississippi Justice Institute ("MJI"). We are a division of the Mississippi Center for Public Policy, an independent, non-profit, public policy organization based in Jackson that works to promote and protect the concepts of free markets, limited government, and strong traditional families. MJI's mission is to represent

Mississippians whose state or federal Constitutional rights have been threatened or violated, and to defend the principles and ideals of MCPP within and throughout the courts.

I read with astonishment the October 13, 2016, letter addressed to you from an out-of-state group called the Freedom From Religion Foundation ("FFRF"), threatening legal consequences for the actions of a high school football coach baptizing one of his players.

The facts as they now stand: Newton High School football coach Ryan Smith engaged in private religious expression outside school hours, after his official duties as a coach had ended, on private property, not during a school-sponsored event, and with other individuals wishing to express their own privately-held religious beliefs. He did not request, encourage, or require anyone, including his players, to attend or participate in this private expression of his and others' religious beliefs. Under these specific circumstances, there was absolutely no constitutional violation by Coach Smith, as he, like all of us, have a First Amendment right under our Federal Constitution and a right under our Mississippi Constitution to freedom of religion.

The allegations by FFRF, taken to their logical conclusion, would prevent any school or government employee from being able to attend a church where a student also attends and prohibit that government employee from ever speaking to students or others at their church about their private religious beliefs. Such allegations are outrageous, ludicrous and in direct contravention of the religious freedoms upon which our country was founded!

The First Amendment to the United States Constitution forbids the government from "prohibiting the free exercise" of religion of private individuals. U.S. Const., Amend. I. This restriction applies to state and local governments through the Fourteenth Amendment. Cantwell v. Connecticut, 310 U.S. 296, 303 (1940); Lovell v. Griffin, 303 U.S. 444, 450 (1938). In addition, the Mississippi Constitution states that "the free enjoyment of all religious sentiments and the different modes of worship shall be held sacred." Miss. Const., Art. III, Section 18 (1890). The United States Supreme Court has rejected the notion that public school employees relinquish First Amendment rights by virtue of their government employment. See Tinker v. DesMoines Indep. Cmty. Sch. Dist., 393 U.S. 503, 506 (1969) ("It can hardly be argued that either students or teachers shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate."); Pickering v. Bd. of Educ., 391 U.S. 563 (1968).

Government may not exclude or suppress the speech of private individuals for the singular reason that their speech is religious. See Good News Club v. Milford Cent. Sch., 533 U.S. 98 (2001); Rosenberger v. Rector & Visitors of the Univ. of Va., 515 U.S. 819 (1995); Capitol Square Review & Advisory Bd. v. Pinette, 515 U.S. 753 (1995); Lamb’s Chapel v. Ctr. Moriches Union Free Sch. Dist., 508 U.S. 384 (1993); Widmar v. Vincent, 454 U.S. 263 (1981). As the Supreme Court explained in Pinette:

[P]rivate religious speech, far from being a First Amendment orphan, is as fully protected under the Free Speech Clause as secular private expression. ... Indeed, in Anglo-American history, at least, government suppression of speech has so commonly been directed precisely at religious speech that a free-speech clause without religion would be Hamlet without the prince.

Pinette, 515 U.S. at 760. While the First Amendment forbids religious activity that is established by the government, it also protects religious activity that is initiated by individuals acting privately. As the Court explained in numerous cases, "there is a crucial difference between government speech endorsing religion, which the Establishment Clause forbids, and private speech endorsing religion, which the Free Speech and Free Exercise Clauses protect." Bd. of Educ. v. Mergens, 496 U.S. 226, 250 (1990) (plurality op.).

These assaults on our religious freedoms by those with an agenda to dismantle our Constitution and our founding principles are the exact types of cases MJI was created to litigate. Thank you for your courage in the face of such threats to protect everyone's right to express their religious beliefs privately in accordance with our federal and state constitutions.

No one likes a bully, and we will not stand by while some out-of-state group threatens our fellow citizens with legal actions for doing nothing more than exercising one's constitutional rights. The Mississippi Justice Institute stands ready, willing and able to defend the actions of those like you who seek to protect such rights as well as others who simply want to exert their unalienable rights privately, which our state and federal Constitutions were intended to secure.

Sincerely,

Mike Hurst, Director
Mississippi Justice Institute
Mississippi Center for Public Policy

Telemedicine: High-Quality, Affordable Care for Mississippi Families
Hearing on Telemedicine
Testimony before the Miss. State Senate, Public Health & Welfare Committee
October 18, 2016
(Unabridged version)

I am Dr. Jameson Taylor, vice president for policy with the Mississippi Center for Public Policy.

This is what we believe about telemedicine: Telemed needs to be allowed to flourish and grow and respond to consumer needs. Burdensome regulations will hinder this growth and reduce access to high-quality care. To repeat: We believe telemedicine needs to be allowed to flourish and grow and respond to consumer needs. Burdensome regulations will hinder this growth and reduce access to high-quality care.

You might say we believe in a free market for healthcare. What this really means is that we believe that a light regulatory touch will promote the supply side of healthcare and solve the problem of access by increasing quality and lowering cost. In other words, if government stays out of the way, healthcare innovation will massively increase the supply of affordable, high-quality care. This strategy has worked for computers and cell phones. Why not healthcare?

But I am here today, not as a healthcare policy analyst, but to share my own telemed story with you.

I am married and have two children. Over the past few years, our family has paired telemed with a High Deductible Health Plan. Our family deductible is typically $5,000 a year. What this means is that my insurance company does not cover a dime of my healthcare until I spend $5,000 out of pocket. In this respect, my family is not different from many others in Mississippi. For instance, if we look at the health insurance policies on the ACA exchange, we see deductibles ranging from $4,000 to $13,000.

Just yesterday, I pulled up a plan for a family of four in Hinds County. One option was a bronze plan from Magnolia Health at a cost of $800 a month and a deductible of $13,600 a year.

I guarantee that if you have a deductible of $13,000 a year, you are going to act like an informed consumer for healthcare because you are going to be paying cash, almost exclusively, for your care. That, at least is how my family and I shop for healthcare. We approach healthcare as consumers and believe that a free market for healthcare is the best way to attain high-quality care at a fair price.

When we consider taking our kids to the doctor for the usual problems: sniffles, an ear infection, a stomach ache, we have a choice between using telemed at $40 a visit or going to our pediatric specialist for $165 or going to MEA for around $120. Depending on the situation, we choose the option we think is best for our family. Sometimes it is telemed, sometimes it is an in-office visit, sometimes it is MEA.

Let me walk you through a typical telemed visit for us. Our usual provider, by the way, is connected with Blue Cross Blue Shield and is called Doctor on Demand.

Last year, our daughter had the typical crud that turned into a fever. We had a family event coming up, and my wife wanted to make sure we did all we could to get our daughter feeling better. That said, it wasn't a very serious illness. At $40 a visit, we chose to use telemed. The alternative would have been an in-office visit at $165. Under those circumstances, we would not have gone to the doctor.

I want to make this point very clear: This is not an apples to apples scenario. If you hinder access to telemed, you are not necessarily generating new business for brick-and-mortar doctors. You are, for some people - the single mom with no cash to spare, a family on vacation down in Biloxi, a truck driver on the road -eliminating that doctor's visit altogether.

Money and time are not infinite resources - at least not in my world and not for the hardworking people of Mississippi. If we did not have the option of using telemed in this case, we would not have gone to the doctor at all. We would have waited things out and hoped our daughter recovered.

Again, our situation is not unusual. We all know access to healthcare is a problem in Mississippi. One-third of our population is underserved because we do not have enough primary care physicians and rural doctors.

This problem will not be resolved by giving everyone an insurance card - whether it be private insurance or government-sponsored insurance, like Medicaid.

According to a recent study by researchers at the Social Science Research Center at Miss. State:

• "32% of adults covered by private insurance (ages 50-64) reported difficulties in obtaining an appointment when seeking an initial appointment with a primary care physician";

• "35% of Medicare-insured adults (ages 65 and older) reported problems when seeking a new appointment"; and

• "Up to half of primary care physicians' offices in Mississippi are not accepting new Medicaid patients."

All of these people have insurance, but they are having trouble obtaining primary care.

I believe we are making a fatal mistake in approaching healthcare in Mississippi from an attitude of scarcity and protectionism. We have an abundance of healthcare needs. We have so much need we can't handle it all. Why regulate a telemed market that is clearly working to address some of these needs?

The study from Mississippi State also notes the following:

"Even with health insurance, access to care may be limited by several factors, including whether one can contact doctors' offices by telephone during office hours, whether one can receive a scheduled appointment within a reasonable amount of time, lengthy waits in doctors' waiting rooms, restrictive clinic hours, and patient access to transportation."

Telemed can help with all of these access problems.

In our case, we usually use telemed early in the morning or late at night, when we are trying to figure out just how sick we are and whether we need to take a sick day from school or work.

Likewise, the wait for a telemed appointment is usually 10 minutes or less. In our case, we are able to pull up a screen full of doctors - all of them licensed in Mississippi - and choose the doctor we want. Usually, we choose the same doctor. Her primary practice is in California.

As far as waiting rooms go, I also want to add that, frankly, as a parent, the last thing you want to do is expose your child and yourself to other sick patients in the waiting room. The last time my wife took our kids in for a routine checkup, our doctor informed her that she was seeing a lot of children with hand-foot-and-mouth disease. That is not a comforting thought when you are in a crowded waiting room trying to keep your toddler from chewing on and handling everything he can reach.

Indeed, in my research on this issue, I found several medical sources that suggested simply avoiding the waiting room altogether. Advises Dr. Hansa Bhargava, medical editor for WebMD:

"As a doctor, here are some guidelines I use for myself:

"Stay home if you can. Ask yourself: are you sick enough to need to go in? Granted, this can be a hard decision. ...

"If you are not sure whether you need to come in, try calling your doctor's office. This way, you may be able to save yourself a visit."

Telemed delivers the best of both worlds. It allows you to stay home and see your doctor. My family and I value the convenience and, if you will, additional safety, telemedicine provides. For me, a quick telemed visit may mean the difference between missing a morning of work or not. For my kids, it means the same when it comes to school. For my wife, it means access to high-quality care at the touch of a button. Imagine that, at the touch of a button. ... But isn't that the kind of service we expect today?

You can order all manner of life-saving products online - for instance, that last-minute wedding anniversary gift ... at the touch of a button.

You can book a dream vacation - instead of going to a travel agent - at the touch of a button.

You can sit in on courses at MIT and radically change the direction of your entire life - at the touch of a button.

Why is healthcare so radically different that we are going to deny consumers this same choice?

To get back to our routine telemed visit, during the last three visits, we have been offered a prescription twice. In my limited research, this is on par with the national average for in-office visits.

And, let me be honest, if you are going to pay $165 for a doctor's visit, you kind of expect to walk out of the office with some kind of vindication that you were right to go to the doctor - a prescription. Many patients want that antibiotic, even if it's just for a bad cold. When you pay $40 for a visit and you hear that all you really need is some sleep and orange juice, you feel a lot better about the hit to your pocketbook.

Before I end, one thing I want to mention is that we prefer to connect with our telemed doctor over the phone, as opposed to video feed. I live in Jackson. I have a decent internet connection. Many Mississippians do not. Just like any technology, you want multiple options: both phone only and video.

I suspect, too, that my wife prefers the phone consult because, then, she doesn't feel like she has to do her hair and make the kids picture perfect before seeing our doctor.

In any event, the phone consult has worked well for us. Indeed, I imagine nearly every person here has been on one end or another of a phone-only consult with their brick-and-mortar doctor.

Of course, most doctors doing telemed ARE brick-and-mortar doctors. As I mentioned, they are also licensed by the state of Mississippi.

And that is, really, what all this comes down to. If the state is going to license doctors, it needs to trust these doctors to serve their patients in whatever setting they choose.

Whether it's in a telemed setting or an office setting, we have to trust the doctors to make the best decisions for their patients. Otherwise, the state shouldn't license doctors to begin with. We also have to trust families like mine to make the best healthcare decisions we can for our children. ... Because I guarantee that I care a lot more about my kid's safety and health and my own health than any other person in this room.

Finally, I want to end with a quick story about Billy Durant. Durant co-founded General Motors. But before he founded GM, he worked for a carriage maker. As a carriage maker, he vehemently spoke out about how dangerous automobiles were. He called the new technology "smelly, noisy, and dangerous." He even refused to let his daughter ride in a car. Less than four years later, Durant co-founded GM.

Like the automobile revolution during Durant's day, the healthcare revolution has already begun. We can use our smartphones to monitor blood sugar levels and measure heart rates. Patients increasingly want to text and web chat their doctors. Soon, we are going to see nanotechnologies that can be implanted in patients, perhaps making routine doctor visits a thing of the past. Government cannot regulate all of these innovations. And Mississippi shouldn't let bureaucracy be the reason we don't share in this progress. Take a cue from Billy Durant and join the winning side - the side that promises to expand the supply of high-quality, low-cost care for the people of Mississippi.

Thank you.