Blog - Page 34 of 193 - Mississippi Center for Public Policy

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

(Jackson, MS): On Thursday, Federal District Court Judge Carlton W. Reeves handed a first-round legal victory to a Jackson physical therapist in his challenge to Mississippi laws that are preventing him from opening up a new home health care business in Jackson. Charles “Butch” Slaughter filed his lawsuit in December 2020, after a 40-year-old moratorium on new home health agencies prevented him from expanding his clinic to offer in-home physical therapy to homebound patients. Even if this ban didn’t exist, he still might not be able to provide in-home services, since his competitors could use Mississippi’s Certificate of Needs (CON) laws to force him to battle them in court over whether the community really needs a new home health agency. The Mississippi Justice Institute, a non-profit, constitutional litigation center and legal arm of the Mississippi Center for Public Policy, is representing Slaughter.

In his order denying the state’s motion to dismiss the suit, Judge Reeves notes that “It is no secret that significant financial interests are at stake when it comes to CON laws.” Judge Reeves explains that “Rent-seeking businesses make a sort-of ‘extra-legal’ contract with politicians: money and votes for the politicians, regulations that ensure a monopoly for the interest group. Meanwhile, consumers lose out. Without the market competition that normally regulates businesses’ behavior, the monopoly can charge otherwise unsustainably high prices for otherwise unsustainably mediocre products.”

“The home health moratorium and CON program are unconstitutional laws designed to protect health care monopolies from competition,” said MJI Director Aaron Rice. “We are thrilled that the court recognized that the government shouldn’t be in the business of reducing access to health care to line the pockets of powerful industry insiders, especially during a global pandemic.”

Slaughter saw a critical need for Mississippi patients to receive care in their homes, especially during the pandemic when many people are seeking alternatives to nursing homes and other care facilities that have been prone to outbreaks. His dream, though, was ended by the state’s moratorium and CON laws, which say that there is no need for new home health agencies in Mississippi, despite the fact that the number of patients seeking home care in the state has at least tripled while the moratorium has been in place. Rather than encouraging new businesses to respond to this increased demand, Mississippi’s laws allow large health care companies to monopolize home health services in the state.

Numerous studies have shown that CON laws do not reduce health costs and can serve as a barrier to patients getting the care they need. In 2004, the Federal Trade Commission and the United States Department of Justice issued a joint report, concluding, “CON programs are not successful in containing health care costs, and that they pose serious anticompetitive risks that usually outweigh their purported economic benefits.”

“No one should be banned from offering safe, cost-effective, and needed health care services just because other businesses don’t want competition,” said MJI volunteer attorney Seth Robbins. “Health care costs are already out of control and these laws only make that worse. Mississippi’s home health moratorium and CON laws are unconstitutional, and we’re looking forward to proving it at trial.”

For media inquiries, please reach out to Stone Clanton, [email protected].

In recent years there has been an increasing call to expand Medicaid in the state of Mississippi, with assurances of “free money” and a boost to the state economy. Despite such rosy pictures, recent events have demonstrated the danger of inviting an increasingly hostile federal government with open arms.

In November 2021, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) issued a rule that required staff members of the facilities that participate in Medicaid or Medicare to be vaccinated, with limited religious and medical exceptions. While the mandate was challenged in court, an opinion issued on January 13th, 2022, the United States Supreme Court ruled that the facilities must comply with the CMS vaccine order to continue to receive CMS funding, with the reasoning that Congress had already granted CMS such authority.

The legal doctrines surrounding the challenge to the mandate are outside the scope of this article. But ultimately, the bottom line is that the Mississippi nurses and doctors who have served on the front lines of the pandemic for months will now be subject to the whims of Washington. Instead of making personal choices regarding vaccinations, those in the hospital system have had the decision made for them by federal bureaucrats.

Granted, most of those in the hospital system are already vaccinated. However, the hospital system across the nation is already seeing an exodus of staff as they grapple with long hours, hazardous conditions, and demanding workloads. This has led to a staffing shortage and higher demand. Many hospitals have to pay exponentially higher pay rates just to keep staff in place. This has pushed many hospitals in the nation to the brink of bankruptcy.

The recent requirement from CMS adds to the existing strains. Right from the outset, hospital staff that have made the personal decision to remain unvaccinated will now be subject to discipline and/or termination. But furthermore, even the staff that might already be vaccinated now have clear signals from the federal government that the hospital staff could be subjected to increasingly draconian measures. Instead of waiting for the next round of edicts that might put them on the blacklist, many within the hospital system may simply choose to head for the exit and look for other opportunities. After all, the tyranny that comes for your neighbor today can just as easily come for you tomorrow.

This state of affairs hinges back to the fundamental question before Mississippi when it considers Medicaid expansion. Of course, there are strong arguments against Medicaid expansion from fiscal and policy angles, and such arguments absolutely stand true. But the recent actions CMS shed light on another angle of the issue.

In the case of vaccine mandates for hospital employees, the state is forced to comply against her will. This particular mandate applied to expansion and non-expansion states. However, can the state really complain if it further invites this same federal agency with open arms through Medicaid expansion and freedoms are infringed on some other way at a later date? States that have expanded Medicaid have seen far more federal control than non-expansion states. And naturally, one shouldn’t be surprised. The “power of the purse” is very real, and the more the federal government funds something, the more it controls it No matter the lofty promises of Medicaid expansion, no one can calculate the value of the freedom of Mississippians into a spreadsheet. Even if the federal government made Medicaid expansion seem more enticing, the question of tradeoffs must be asked. At the end of the day, is there any price tag that would justify Mississippi handing over even more control to a federal government on a trajectory that is all but disconnected from the interests of the people of the state? If the price of “free money” from Washington is a reduction in freedom itself, then that is a price tag far too high to pay.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

(Jackson, MS): Today, the United States Supreme Court issued an administrative stay temporarily halting enforcement of the Biden Administration’s vaccine mandate for private employers, which has been challenged in court by multiple states and private employers, including Gulf Coast Restaurant Group which is represented by the Mississippi Justice Institute (MJI).

The mandate requires companies with over 100 employees to force their employees to be vaccinated, or be subject to weekly testing and constant mask wearing – on pain of losing their job. Companies can face fines of up to $14,000 per violation for failing to enforce the mandate.

The mandate was scheduled to take effect on January 10, 2022. However, the Court’s administrative stay prevents the Biden Administration from taking any steps to enforce the mandate while litigation continues to determine whether the mandate is lawful.

“This decision is a major victory in our client’s fight against the Biden Administration’s unconstitutional vaccine mandate,” said MJI Director Aaron Rice. “We will continue fighting against the private employer mandate and we have every confidence that the Supreme Court will put a permanent stop to this unprecedented federal overreach.”

The Mississippi Justice Institute is a non-profit, constitutional litigation center and the legal arm of the Mississippi Center for Public Policy.

For media inquiries, please reach out to Stone Clanton, [email protected].

Yesterday, the House of Representatives passed HB 531 to repeal the Mississippi income tax.

HB 531, also known as the "Mississippi Tax Freedom Act of 2022," was principally authored by Speaker Philip Gunn, along with Representatives Lamar, White, Steverson, Barnett, Massengill, Bain, Newman, Rushing, Kinkade, Morgan, Pigott, J. Ford, Calvert, Smith, Creekmore IV, Goodin, Tullos, Carpenter, Hood, Oliver, Robinson, and Boyd.

Similar to the 2021 income tax elimination House bill increases the tax exemption available to Mississippians (for single workers, the exemption would go up from $6,000 to $37,700 and for married workers, from $12,000 to $75,400). The remainder of the income tax elimination would occur in subsequent years by allowing a 1.5% rate of growth in spending but applying any revenue collected over that rate to increase the exemption until the tax is completely repealed. The Increases the sales tax rate is still there, though the offset is a full percentage point lower. The new bill also still reduces the grocery sales tax rate in subsequent years.

This year’s bill does have some differences, though, including the omission of the special interest sales tax rate increases. Additionally, this year’s plan supplements counties from the state to allow for a 35% reduction in car tags. Both of these are major improvements to the bill, as well as the reduction in increase in the proposed sales tax rate.

We applaud the efforts to abolish this awful levy, as we believe repealing the state income tax would be both a moral and economic good, leading to higher incomes, competitiveness, and prosperity for all Mississippians!

The Mississippi Center for Public Policy approves of this legislation and will continue to update you as the 2022 Mississippi Legislative Session continues, and you can keep up with measures by watching our Legislative Tracker.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

(Jackson, MS): Yesterday the Mississippi House of Representatives voted to repeal the state income tax with HB 531. The Mississippi Tax Freedom Act of 2022 was principally authored by Speaker Philip Gunn, along with Representatives Lamar, White, Steverson, Barnett, Massengill, Bain, Newman, Rushing, Kinkade, Morgan, Pigott, J. Ford, Calvert, Smith, Creekmore IV, Goodin, Tullos, Carpenter, Hood, Oliver, Robinson, and Boyd.

The Mississippi Center for Public Policy welcomes this early "victory" as a sign of hope and a mark of achievement on the 2022 Freedom Agenda.

Similar to the 2021 income tax elimination House bill:

Increases the tax exemption available to Mississippians. For single workers, the exemption would go up from $6,000 to $37,700 and for married workers, from $12,000 to $75,400.; The remainder of the income tax elimination would occur in subsequent years by allowing a 1.5% rate of growth in spending but applying any revenue collected over that rate to increase the exemption until the tax is completely repealed.
Increases the sales tax rate.
Reduces the grocery sales tax rate in subsequent years.

This year's bill does have some differences, though, including the omission of the special interest sales tax rate increases. Additionally, this year's plan supplements counties from the state to allow for a 35% reduction in car tags.

“Three cheers to the House of Representatives for voting to abolish the state income tax!” said Douglas Carswell, President & CEO of the Mississippi Center for Public Policy. “Our state needs a boost, and getting rid of the state income tax will give every Mississippi worker a tax break and help our economy to become more competitive. Neither Texas, Tennessee, nor Florida have a state income tax – and they are thriving. Scrapping Mississippi’s state income tax would help lift up our state.”

Senior Director of Policy & Communications Hunter Estes said, “This directly allows hard-working Mississippians to keep more of their own money, which is an idea everyone should be able to get behind. We're hopeful the Senate will pass this major legislation, too.”

The Mississippi Center for Public Policy believes repealing the state income tax would be both a moral and economic good, leading to higher incomes, competitiveness, and prosperity for all Mississippians!

For media inquiries, please reach out to Stone Clanton, [email protected].

A government by the people and for the people can only stay that way if it is accountable to the people. Every year, millions of taxpayer dollars, and thousands of Mississippi’s children are put through government schools in the state. While the state has fairly stringent accountability standards for many government entities, education transparency has not received the attention that it should.

The concept of transparency is not at all foreign to state governments. In fact, Mississippi has several provisions designed to promote transparency within state government by requiring financial disclosures posted online, open meetings, and other measures for various state entities. But how far have such efforts gone within the government school system?

Even though many other government entities have relatively stringent accountability protocols, the education system has not seen the fullest degree of accountability possible. While the state education system often makes its general academic directives public, there is often a degree of ambiguity even about what is specifically being taught on a day-to-day basis.

Many states have recently enacted academic transparency laws to remedy such ambiguity and have more transparency on what children are being taught. Rather than leaving citizens, taxpayers, and parents to wonder about what is being taught, such laws require the education system to post actual curriculum online for public inspection. Such measures are all the timelier in our day for two primary reasons, both from the standpoint of technological advancements that enable such accountability, and a growth in the polarization between parents and school administrators.

In the first place, the widespread of the internet, smartphones, and social media have all made the dissemination of information easier, cheaper, and more effective than ever before. In former days, an academic transparency measure might have required more expensive and time-consuming methods, such as mailing the public curriculum to individual addresses. Such technical challenges have been practically removed. Using the internet, even the most basic and inexpensive technology of today has the ability to publish school records publicly for millions of citizens to see.

Finally, issues such as Critical Race Theory, “Gender Theory,” and other issues have become increasingly divisive issues as parents across the country are coming to grips with an increasingly radicalized academic establishment. In order for citizens to be informed on what the government schools are actually teaching, posting curriculum online is a basic first step.

Transparency and accountability to the people are among the most fundamental ingredients of a good government. If the state of Mississippi has requirements for other government entities to post their information on the internet, government school administrators should be required to do the same with school curriculum.

Ultimately, a policy of accountability and open information for school curriculum is a policy grounded in the fundamentals of our nation’s founding ideals. Fundamentally, by giving the citizens a working knowledge of their government, the power is placed in the hands of the people -where it belongs. For in the words of Thomas Jefferson: “knowledge is power, knowledge is safety, and knowledge is happiness.” It’s time for the Mississippi Legislature to ensure that its people have the means and ability to have such knowledge and be completely informed about government school curriculum.

We are now over a week into this year’s legislative session. Hundreds of bills have already been dropped in the House and Senate on a vast range of topics.

Let’s jump right into the update on The Good, The Bad, and The Interesting…

The Good:

HB 464, the College Sticker Price Act of 2022, from Rep. Donnie Bell, would have Mississippi higher education institutions create a public calculator that would allow prospective students to better understand the costs of college and the availability of technical and vocational programs. This bill would be a big win for transparency within higher education and would help to strengthen the Mississippi workforce and give prospective students the capacity for greater reflection before deciding on career paths.

HB 415 and SB 2089, from Rep. Nick Bain and Sen. Angela Hill respectively, would both place limitations on the salary of the Mississippi State Superintendent. MCPP’s Fat Cat Report, released over the summer, revealed the largesse that exists in the salaries of many public officials. We currently have one of the highest-paid superintendents in the nation. We applaud these attempts to reel in the administrative state.

HB 231, from Rep. Lee Yancey, would authorize public and private employee exemptions from Covid-19 vaccine mandates. Government vaccine mandates, especially those concerning private businesses, are a massive overstep of governmental authority. This is a good bill that defends the freedom of Mississippians from encroachment.

HB 493, from Rep. Steve Hopkins and Rep. Dana Criswell, would give greater freedom to licensed physical therapists to help patients. With skyrocketing healthcare costs, we need to take substantive steps like this to reduce barriers to access and drive down costs.

The Bad:

HB 54 would automatically register voters. Clean voter rolls have become a major issue for Mississippi and states across the nation. Areas that have instituted similar policies have often had tremendous difficulty with messy voter rolls with a range of folks becoming or remaining registered who should not.

The Interesting:

Speaker Philip Gunn released the Mississippi Tax Freedom Act of 2022. The legislation seeks to get rid of the income tax, which would have a profound impact on the Mississippi economy and would allow hardworking Mississippians to keep more of their own money. We’ll be reviewing the legislation and providing further details on the impact of the bill.

HB 444 would create a committee to produce an official state song of Mississippi. We can only hope that if this happens then Gov. Reeves, Speaker Gunn, and Lt. Gov. Hosemann will offer the first rendition of the new tune.

As bills move through the legislative process, you can stay updated on them, learn about what they do, and find out how your legislators are voting through our Legislative Tracker.

If you have questions about upcoming legislative issues, please feel free to send me a question.

All the Best,

Hunter Estes, Senior Director of Policy & Communications

The Mississippi Legislature is taking the fight to Critical Race Theory with legislation aiming to ensure that public institutions of learning shall direct or compel students to affirm that all are equal.

Senator Michael McLendon (R-D. 1) has drafted a bill based on the Mississippi Center for Public Policy’s recent policy paper, Combatting Critical Race Theory in Mississippi. The act shall provide that no publicly-funded educational institution will be able to compel students to think that any sex, race, ethnicity, religion, or any other factor that an individual can or may not be able to change about themselves makes them any less of a person, inferior, nor superior. The legislation is simply about affirming that all are equal.

No one should have an issue with such a bill. Yet, around the country, there are constant talking-points from those on the Left either saying that there is no need for such a bill because Critical Race Theory is not being taught and is a “right-wing conspiracy” or those on the Left saying, “Yes, it is being taught and should be, therefore there is no need for a bill to combat it!” The fact of the matter is that – as our paper pointed out – Critical Race Theory is being taught in Mississippi in some form or fashion, and it is up to us to combat this Marxist-like agenda.

The best way to combat Critical Race Theory is with a good idea replacing the bad one it is. As the bill reiterates, we are all equal. The famous line from the Declaration of Independence goes: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” Did America always live by this principle? No, but this amazing country has come so far and made so much progress. Whether it be the Constitution and Bill of Rights, the Emancipation Proclamation, innovation, Women’s Suffrage, or the Civil Rights Movement, we have shown the world that America is the greatest opportunity for human flourishing. Mississippi is no different.

The Mississippi Legislature has recently gaveled back into session, and unfortunately, not all bills are in the best interest of the state. One such bill, House Bill 206 introduced by Representative Robert Johnson, proposes raising the minimum wage to the arbitrary amount of $10.00 an hour. Such a proposal could threaten thousands of jobs and ultimately lead to economic hardship for many.

In order to understand the effect of minimum wage laws on actual wages and employment, it is important to consider the effects that such laws have had in states that raised the mandatory minimum wage. Fundamentally, when the heavy hand of government attempts to arbitrarily determine what employers must pay their employees, the effects can be devastating for employers and their employees.

Mississippi does not currently have a state-mandated minimum wage. Instead, employers in the state are subject to the federal minimum wage of $7.25 an hour. The federal minimum wage has a disproportionately high effect in Mississippi versus other states. This is because the dollar has more purchasing power in Mississippi than in any other state. Furthermore, it is harder for Mississippi businesses to generate a dollar of capital than other states. For instance, the federal hourly wage of $7.25 in Mississippi has the same purchasing power as $8.12 in Utah, where the federal minimum is the standard as well. Despite this, Mississippi is required to follow the same federal minimum wage as Utah.

While the federal minimum wage already has a disproportionate effect on Mississippi, House Bill 206 proposes raising the state minimum wage to $10.00 an hour, $2.75 above the federal standard. Because individual dollars have a high purchasing power in Mississippi and are harder for businesses to earn, such legislation could have an even-higher burden on workers and businesses than what has been seen in other states that have raised the minimum wage.

Consider the state of California. California has raised its minimum wage steadily over the last several years, which has ultimately led to a steady decrease in employment growth for certain industries. For instance, a Harvard Business School study found that a $1 increase in the minimum wage requirement led to a 14 percent increase in the likelihood of the closure of 3-star restaurants in the San Francisco area. Needless to say, when businesses close, it leaves many of the employees without employment at all.

California stands as a cautionary tale, and its minimum wage currently stands at $14 an hour for small businesses with less than 25 employees. The current proposal to raise the minimum wage to $10 in Mississippi might seem to be distant from the $14 wage in California. However, a $10 minimum wage in Mississippi could have the same negative effects as a $14 minimum wage in California. Because the dollar's purchasing power is higher in Mississippi, $10 in Mississippi is the equivalent of $13.30 in California -which is not too far from the damaging $14 minimum wage that has plagued California. Mississippi needs economic expansion, and the state should not handcuff businesses from providing employment. Rather than using the power of government to force businesses to follow arbitrary increases on the minimum wage, the state should reduce heavy-handed taxes and regulations that burden businesses and workers. The free market provides the tools for workers and businesses to grow. Mississippi should let its people work. A key way to do that is to avoid arbitrary minimum wage increases.