“Too many boards and commissions in our state have far too much power to decide public policy."
“Drain the swamp!” How often have we heard this phrase bandied about by politicians seeking to signal that they are on our side?
Those that we send to Washington often refer to DC as “the swamp”, a place full of federal bureaucrats making public policy with little reference to the public. But what about the swamp closer to home?
Before complaining about the federal fat cat agencies in Washington, we ought to acknowledge that there are plenty of self-serving bureaucrats right there in Mississippi.
A new report, “Drain the Swamp – the administrative state in Mississippi,” published by the Mississippi Center for Public Policy shows that Mississippi’s bureaucrats are out of control. Of the 222 agencies and boards that we reviewed, we found that only a tiny minority are headed by a directly elected official. Of those that are appointed, the state Senate confirms only a small minority.
The administrative state in Mississippi is able to make public policy and spend public money with too little accountability to the public.
Of course, there are plenty of departments and boards that are essential to effective public administration. But Mississippi has dozens of agencies and boards that we could probably do without. I have no doubt that plenty of good people work for the Auctioneer Commission or the Board of Physical Therapists. But other states seem to cope without such entities. Might Mississippi be able to manage without an Interior Design Advisory Committee?
When Ronald Reagan launched his presidential campaign at the Neshoba County Fair in 1980, he famously observed how “When you create a government bureaucracy, no matter how well-intentioned it is, almost instantly its primary priority becomes the preservation of the bureaucracy.”
The Gipper was absolutely right back then, and the problem has grown much worse since.
Too many boards and commissions in our state have far too much power to decide public policy. Often this is the fault of the legislature that has delegated to these agencies broad powers. But it is also, as Reagan understood, in the nature of bureaucracy to expand unless it is kept in check.
Our report makes a number of suggestions to make more of Mississippi’s public officials better accountable to the public. We propose reining in the wide discretion that the legislature has foolishly granted officials. We suggest sunset provisions to ensure that bureaucracy does not continue to expand long after it has served its initial purpose. Our report considers giving the legislature more effective oversight over the bureaucracy and how it spends public money. We even suggest that it might be time to eliminate some agencies altogether.
Many of these agencies and commissions have become a source of patronage. They are run in the interests of vested interests. Instead of economic freedom, they have spawned a cartel economic system in our state, in which someone’s permission is always needed to do something.
The key to achieving economic prosperity in Mississippi is to overturn this cartel economic system and eliminate our home-grown version of the administrative state. Our report shows how.
This editorial, written by the Mississippi Center for Public Policy CEO & President Douglas Carswell, was featured in Y'all Politics on May 31.
For the first time in twenty years, Americans will commemorate Memorial Day this year in peacetime, and in the shadow of the two longest wars in U.S. history. As we honor and remember those from all of our wars who did not make it home, we should also view those veterans who did in an accurate light.
For many veterans, Memorial Day is a time of mourning that brings difficult memories of losing friends. It can bring feelings of guilt for surviving when those friends did not. It can even bring reminders of other painful events experienced on the battlefield.
While they have endured physical and emotional suffering, we should recognize our veterans not just for the burdens of the fight, but for having emerged from it even stronger. They are warriors, not hapless victims.
After I lost friends in Iraq and was injured there, people often told me things like: “If it was going to happen, it couldn’t have happened to a better person. You had the strength to overcome it.” This appears to be the conventional wisdom about trauma: that it is almost always harmful to a person and usually produces lifelong misery and maladjustment, but that a brave few are naturally endowed with enough resilience to face life-altering adversity and overcome it. Hollywood, politicians, and the media fuel this stereotype, often portraying veterans as fragile, psychologically damaged victims.
But I see it differently. Retired four-star general and former secretary of defense James Mattis does too. “There is one misperception of our veterans and that is they are somehow damaged goods,” said General Mattis, speaking at the Marine Memorial Foundation in 2014. "I don't buy it."
To be clear, many veterans have indeed been damaged by war. Some are even at risk of homelessness or suicide. They deserve the support and care of a grateful nation. But the veteran-as-victim trope portrays veterans as fragile and deserving of pity, which is not how veterans feel – even those struggling with the physical and mental wounds of war.
Despite the indisputable grief and personal loss experienced by many veterans, most return home and build a new life – a life with a noble purpose that would honor the sacrifices of their fellow service members who did not get that chance. Their experience points to a different conclusion: that human beings are naturally resilient.
Most of us grow from losses and find meaning in them. Everyone talks about post-traumatic stress, which of course is very real and difficult. But, as General Mattis reminded us, “there is also something called post-traumatic growth, where you come out of a situation like [combat] and you actually feel kinder toward your fellow man and fellow woman; that you are actually a better husband, father; you actually have a closer relationship with your God.” While stress after combat or any traumatic event is inevitable, it can be the precursor to growth. Overall, “you come back from war stronger and more sure of who you are,” Mattis said.
Many of us fear we could never overcome tragedy because we would never choose it willingly. But when the illusion of choice is taken away, we find that we can not only survive it but even grow from it because that is our only path forward. And human beings are wired to survive and move forward.
General Mattis has a theory about why so many want to paint veterans as victims. “While victimhood in America is exalted, I don't think our veterans should join those ranks,” he said. Given the coveted status
of victimhood today, it is no surprise that well-meaning people would seek to bestow that special status upon veterans. But our veterans want no pity. And the truth is that it would only hold them back. They already have the growth and meaning that comes from serving a noble cause and overcoming real tragedy. They know that seeking pity, from themselves or others, would only hinder their ability to succeed in their new life missions.
Aaron Rice is an Iraq War veteran and a Purple Heart recipient. He is also the director of the Mississippi Justice Institute, a nonprofit, constitutional litigation center and the legal arm of the Mississippi Center for Public Policy.
Mississippi’s administrative state has a major democratic deficit, according to a new report published today.
Of the 222 state government bureaucracies reviewed in the report, only 5 percent are headed by a directly elected official. The state Senate only confirms a small minority of appointees to other key positions.
According to the report, published by the Mississippi Center for Public Policy, the administrative state in Mississippi has the ability to spend money and decide on public policy without reference to the public. 81% of bureaucratic spending comes from agencies run by appointed leaders with very little regulatory accountability.
The report acknowledges that certain departments or boards are essential to the success of Mississippi, but that there are dozens of agencies the state could probably do without. Might not Mississippi be able to manage without an Interior Design Advisory Committee?
“When people talk about ‘draining the swamp,’ they usually mean Washington D.C.,” explained CEO & President Douglas Carswell. “Our research shows that there is a ‘swamp’ here in Mississippi that needs dealing with, too.”
In order to assess the entire administrative state of Mississippi, we analyzed four elements of 222 state boards, agencies and commissions: accountability, spending power and size, regulatory power and function. Our findings reveal that while much of the state bureaucracy is unaccountable, it is well-resourced and has expanded in terms of its regulatory remit.
“We reviewed 222 state-based bureaucratic organizations here in Mississippi, and we discovered that there is a serious accountability deficit,” Carswell said. “Big, powerful bureaucratic organizations are able to impose rules and spend public money without meaningful accountability to the public.”
What should we do about the administrative state of Mississippi? How can we hold these bureaucrats accountable, and how can we better manage the regulations and functionality of these boards? We at the Mississippi Center for Public Policy have some suggestions.
1. Rein in the broad discretion given to bureaucrats by laying out parameters for regulations and requiring routine audits
2. Establish more grassroots accountability through elections by expanding the amount of elected,rather than appointed agency representatives
3. Look at the possibility of term limits for high-level officials to help remove the problems that cancome from a system of career-centered bureaucrats
4. Consolidate or eliminate certain entities to save taxpayer dollars
5. Put in a sunset provision that requires any new regulation to be automatically repealed after acertain period of time if not extended, in order to eliminate the overbearing regulatory authority
6. Require all unelected regulators to submit annual public reports to the legislature outliningenforcement actions, subjecting these entities to higher scrutiny
The Mississippi Center for Public Policy believes “draining the swamp” would have a positive impact on the state by eliminating unnecessary agencies that negatively hold back citizens, while also ensuring those in power do not have an overabundance of money and control.
For media inquiries, please contact Tyler B. Jones, [email protected].
Here are five specific actions Mississippi legislators could take that would cut crime in Jackson.
The Mississippi Center for Public Policy has hired Tyler B. Jones as its new Communications Director
Tyler B. Jones, a native of Vaughan, Mississippi, will serve as the Mississippi Center for Public Policy's new Communications Director. Through this position, she will aim to raise the profile of MCPP to the public, as well as manage all digital media and produce content to engage viewers.
Jones studied journalism and public relations at the University of Southern Mississippi and recently graduated from Mississippi State University with a Master of Public Policy and Administration degree. During her time at MSU, Jones worked as a bureau news reporter for The Commercial Dispatch, covering Starkville and Oktibbeha County local government.
"I am absolutely delighted that Tyler is joining our growing team,” said Douglas Carswell, President & CEO. “Tyler has a background in local journalism and has a first-class understanding of the media landscape across our state. As Mississippi’s free-market think tank, our output is read and watched by tens of thousands each month. Tyler will help expand our reach in Mississippi and beyond”.
Jones' first day was Monday. She is passionate about education reform, free speech and defending the safety and integrity of law enforcement. She has lived in Mississippi since she was five years old and has great love and pride for the Magnolia State.
"I'm so thrilled to be working at MCPP," Jones said. "With my background in communications and knowledge of policy, I intend to bring new ideas to the organization, while hopefully making a lasting impact on our state."
In the first week of May there were six homicides in Jackson, Mississippi. How many more will we see before the end of the month?
Last year Jackson had the highest homicide rate of any city in America, with 155 homicides. To put that grisly statistic in perspective, that was about the same number of homicides as happened in Atlanta, a city with almost four times the population.
What is more shocking than the murder rate, is the attitude of those that make endless excuses for it.
Some officials invoke that catch-all excuse for every failure, Covid. Homicide rates did increase at the same time that there was a pandemic, but correlation is not causation. It is doubtful that the virus somehow made people more violent.
Some of the Mississippi media seem desperate to avoid being seen to blame Jackson’s city leadership. Rather like the failure to provide the city with running water, everything but the city leadership is held responsible. Why? It does a disservice to Jackson residents.
Honest reporting should hold to account those making bad public policy choices today, and not insist on looking at everything that happens in Mississippi in 2022 through the prism of a distant past.
There is far too much wishful thinking when it comes to crime. If only, some imply, we had one more rehabilitation program or enacted another bill that purported to help ex-offenders all would be okay. Sadly, good intentions don’t cut crime. Being honest about the causes of crime might.
Responsibility for crime lies with criminals. Responsibility for failing to deal with criminals rests with those public officials mandated to run the criminal justice system.
Next time there is another killing, Jackson’s leaders will do what they always do. They will emote about it. What we need to hear instead is what they will actually do.
Here are five specific actions they could take that would cut crime in Jackson:
More police: Despite the often heroic efforts of individual law enforcement officers, there are simply not enough of them.
Prosecute: No matter how effective the police are at chasing suspects through the streets, there are serious failings when it comes to pursuing them through the courts. Who in Jackson has not heard stories of suspects being allowed to walk free?
Detention: The failure to have enough detention capacity in Hinds County is outrageous. Build it.
Clear the courts: The bureaucratic backlog in the courts is perhaps the single biggest impediment to effective justice. Clear the backlog of cases. If those that administer the court system can’t cope, bring in administrators that can.
Work with the state: Every city likes to manage its own affairs. I get that. But the state capital ought to be able to team up with state-wide officials, police forces and prosecutors to tackle a problem that impacts us all.
We at the Mississippi Center for Public Policy are proud to work in Jackson. Jackson might seem caught in a downward spiral, but every city has the power to regenerate itself.
New York in the early 80s seemed caught in a spiral of decline. But the city revived once it got a grip on crime. The key to Jackson’s future is to get a grip on crime.
Douglas Murray spoke to a packed meeting at River Hills Club in Jackson, Mississippi yesterday.
Murray’s new book, War on the West, was announced as a New York Times bestseller the day he landed in Jackson. His book was already the number one selling hardback book in his native Britain the previous week.
“Douglas Murray is the man of the moment. His book is a best seller and I believe is proving to be extremely influential in shaping the way America thinks” said Douglas Carswell, President & CEO of the Mississippi Center for Public Policy, which hosted the event.
“In recent years, Americans have been told that they must feel bad about their country. Progressive professors have taught young Americans that America is always wrong.”
“Heroic figures from America’s past have been denigrated. Statues have been pulled down by the mob. In the name of equity, millions of ordinary Americans get treated unequally.”
“Douglas Murray’s new book uses clear, well-researched insights to show how absurd these ‘woke’ ideas actually are. And he shows how Americans can stand proud”.
Tax cuts are attracting voters in the US. But big government conservatives alienate the anxious electorate elsewhere
It all seemed so different a year ago. Arriving in the United States in early 2021, I assumed that there was much for US conservatives to learn from their British cousins. Boris Johnson had just gained an almighty majority – the largest since Margaret Thatcher’s days – winning in places that had not voted Conservative since before the Second World War.
American conservatism, by contrast, appeared in poor health. Donald Trump had lost the White House in November 2020. States that only a decade earlier had leaned solidly towards the Republicans had suddenly become competitive – and the Republicans seemed determined to lose those competitions. On January 5, 2021, they compounded their defeat in the presidential race with a disastrous special election campaign in Georgia. What should have been a shoo-in ended with them losing control of the United States Senate. Things got even worse the next day. A mob, stirred up by conservative commentators who should have known better, stormed the Capitol. In those grim moments, it looked as if the party of Ronald Reagan was in terminal decline.
Fast-forward to today, and there is still a striking difference between these movements – but with the roles dramatically reversed. As President Biden continues to underwhelm, the Republicans anticipate big gains in the midterms next year. They are ahead in key states such as Virginia – and, indeed, won a hat-trick of statewide contests there only a few months ago, in a state that many assumed had shifted irretrievably leftwards. They are polling remarkably well among middle-class Asian and Hispanic Americans.
In Britain, by contrast, a recent YouGov survey suggests that Boris Johnson’s winning formula is failing, with support plummeting in almost every demographic group. The decline is especially ominous in blue-collar Britain, whose support allowed the Conservatives to win a swathe of formerly Labour seats. After 12 years in office, the Tories have raised taxes to their highest point since the 1950s. Since the last election, median household incomes have fallen, and a cost-of-living crisis is on its way.
Boris may have delivered Brexit and the vaccine rollout, and supported Ukraine brilliantly, but I doubt mentioning that will do the Tories much good. In electoral terms, the vaccine is ancient history. Brexit might have been a wedge issue at the last election; today it conjures up a vague feeling that more might have been done to capitalize on the opportunities.
“Surely,” you might say, “it’s all a question of incumbency.” Aren’t British conservatives simply tanking because, like Biden, they happen to coincide with a cost-of-living crisis while in office? Yet if the Tories are floundering for the same reasons as Biden’s Democrats, it does rather raise the question of why they should be governing as leftists in the first place.
In both countries, inflation is rising rapidly because governments have hosed money and achieved very little growth to show for it. Biden has thrown an additional $2 trillion into public spending since coming to office. Yet while Rishi Sunak has spent such eye-watering sums you might be forgiven for thinking that Corbyn had won the last election, in America, Republican-run states have responded to the cost-of-living crisis by cutting taxes. My own state of Mississippi just passed the largest tax cut in the state’s history. If only British ministers were as receptive to free-market thinking.
US energy costs are soaring in part because the federal government canceled pipelines and discouraged investment in oil and gas. Yet Britain’s Conservatives have somehow gone even further: outlawing fracking and regulating the energy market as you might expect to see in a socialist state. Though leadership feels ever-more dysfunctional in both countries, US conservatives are brilliantly tapping into public anger by devolving power away from the state. Meanwhile, in the UK, the Johnson administration has become a byword for big government.
Thank goodness the federal mask mandate on airplanes in America has been overturned.
Requiring everyone to wear face diapers / nappies at all times in the belief that it would reduce the spread of Covid always seemed pretty ridiculous. The idea that face masks would significantly impact the trajectory of the virus was seldom supported by substantive evidence.
Watching people at airports forced to wear face masks often made me think of the irrational way in which people responded to plagues in the distant past. Wearing face masks to try to stave off a disease ranks alongside wearing charms to try to ward off the evil eye. I always thought of it as a form of federally mandated voodoo.
Forcing folk to wear masks was never benign. It gave airliners and airport authorities additional reasons to boss passengers about, making flying an even more unpleasant experience.
What is interesting about the ending of the mask mandate is that it was a federal judge that took the decisive step. Despite all the evidence that mask mandates are both futile and now unnecessary, it was not the federal bureaucracy that acted.
A couple of weeks ago, we all saw some horrific scenes from China, where a total lock down is in place. People in Shanghai have been confined to their own homes. The police have attacked desperate people.
Why are the authorities acting so differently over there? Is it a different virus? Are masks more effective in China? Do the Chinese authorities know something we don’t?
No. The difference is that here in the United States we have the United States Constitution. This republic has a Bill of Rights and a judiciary prepared to interpret what the law actually says, not what the powerful want it to say.
From Australia to Britain to Peru, officials responded to Covid by imposing asinine – and at times outrageous – restrictions on society in the mistaken belief that they knew what was best for them. They didn’t. Closing schools or banning people from meeting members of their own families was idiotic, and some of us said so at the time.
The instinct of officials in America might have been to impose all sorts of idiocy on people too. And occasionally, especially on the East and West Coasts, they were able to. But thank goodness the American founders drafted a constitution that curbed the worst excesses of those with power.
