“People overestimate what they can accomplish in one legislative session and underestimate what they can accomplish in ten.”
In this series, we are conducting a review of what Mississippi lawmakers have accomplished over the last 10 years. Again, the list provided here is not comprehensive, and we feature only the policies we like, some of which were initiated by MCPP (marked by an *asterisk* below).
Mississippi is one of the most pro-life states in America; although, it is not THE most pro-life state. Louisiana held that distinction until Arkansas recently passed a flurry of pro-life laws in 2020. Still, policymakers in Mississippi have steadily advanced the right to life, enacting balanced measures aimed at protecting the right to life and protecting maternal health.
Here are some of the highlights:
Twenty-week abortion ban: This law (HB 1400), sponsored by Rep. Andy Gipson in 2014, prohibits abortions performed after the baby is 20-weeks old. The law has not been challenged in court.
Dismemberment ban: This law (HB 519) bans second trimester abortions that entail the dismemberment and removal of the dead baby (also known as a D&E abortion). Mississippi was the fourth state in the country to pass this law. It was sponsored by Rep. Sam Mims in 2016. The law has not been challenged in court.
15-week abortion ban: This law (HB 1510), sponsored by Rep. Becky Currie and championed by Senator Joey Fillingane in 2018, prohibits abortions performed after the baby is 15-weeks old. The law has been blocked by a federal court and is under review at the U.S. Supreme Court.*
Heartbeat ban: This law (SB 2116), sponsored by Sen. Angela Hill in 2019, prohibits abortion after the baby’s heartbeat is detected: generally, at about 6 weeks. The law has been blocked by a federal court.
Life Equality Act: This law (HB 1295) prohibits abortions performed with discriminatory intent against a mother and unborn child because of the child’s sex, race or disability. The law was sponsored by Rep. Carolyn Crawford in 2020. The law has not been challenged in court.*
The mission of the Mississippi Technology Institute is to provide a principled analysis of public policy issues with a focus on technological issues.
In the principles contained below, MTI seeks to provide the foundational elements of sound technology policy. Good policies will always follow good principles, and policies will always become flawed when they depart from good principles. MTI seeks to further advance its mission by declaring the key principles that guide its vision, purpose, and actions.
- The free market, not the government, is the gatekeeper of technological innovation.
There is no greater force for technological innovation than the free market at work. With this in mind, it is imperative to recognize that the government is not in a feasible position to effectively act as the gatekeeper of technological innovation. If all innovations must answer to government regulators, there is less potential that innovations will reach their full potential.
On the other hand, the government is not in a position to effectively determine which innovations should be favored and privileged. Since the government’s authority and revenue comes from the people, it makes little sense for government to favor certain innovations if the people themselves have not already given that innovation a thumbs up in the free market.
2. It is not the government’s responsibility to solve every problem that arises from technology.
Personal responsibility under the rule of law is essential for a free society. Without personal responsibility, individuals are relegated to the control of a nanny state. It is essential to recognize that technology is a powerful tool with much potential for good, but individuals are ultimately responsible for how they use technology. The more powerful technological tools are, the greater their capacity for good or for evil. If a government were responsible for removing every technological avenue that could potentially be used in bad faith, we’d have very little technological advancement.
When a new business uses technology to create an innovative concept, the government should not require that the business prove its technology's merit to regulators. The burden of proof lies on the government to objectively demonstrate the harm brought about by a new innovation.
3. Technology is an essential tool for economic prosperity that facilitates new opportunities and expands horizons.
In the dynamic and fast-paced economy of the 21st century, it is essential that businesses are able to adapt to the needs of customers in effective and innovative ways. This can be done using technology. In many ways, technology has become the key to expanded economic prosperity. From a public policy perspective, it is essential that governments ensure that this creative economic activity is welcomed so that existing businesses can grow, and new businesses can launch.
When businesses can harness the power of technology, their economic horizons expand. This often leads to greater profits, more employees, and better services. It’s good economic practice for government to actively remove regulatory obstacles that hinder the implementation of new technologies for existing businesses.
4. The regulation of technology should be informed by objective analysis that reflects the dynamic nature of innovation.
Technological advancement proceeds at an incredibly fast pace. In light of this, objective analysis must inform the regulation of technology. There is little potential for the growth of technology if regulators are subjectively determining the extent of government regulation without the input of subject-matter experts and data analysis.
The assumption that all products and innovations are inherently unsafe until government regulators prove otherwise, presupposes the government is always informed enough to make such determinations. This is simply not the case. Until informed experience and good data demonstrate otherwise, government should exercise a light touch when it comes to new technologies.
5. Technology policy is a tool that should be implemented with public accountability and fiscal responsibility.
Despite the great potential behind emerging technologies, no government policy is exempt from the safeguards of public accountability and fiscal responsibility. Every technological public policy must be reviewed from the perspective of a well-reasoned analysis that starts with principles rather than pragmatism.
No matter how much potential a technological policy may carry, it is not to be exempted from the necessity of cost-benefit analysis. No technology is priceless. From electric cars to solar panels, there are countless developing technologies that have considerable implications on a public policy level. In a day in which many technologies and their corresponding policies are heavily influenced by shifting social or political factors, it is essential that public policy is grounded in a carefully measured understanding of the key issues.
Additionally, it is fundamental that the power of technology be harnessed to facilitate greater government accountability. While technology cannot replace the accountability that the people properly have over the government, it is a critical tool that can assist them in their efforts. Rather than technology being used by the government to monitor the people, technology should be used by the people to monitor the government.
6. Government should not interfere in the free market or free trade by giving special privileges to particular technologies or technology companies.
The free market is not free to the extent that government intervenes. In light of the dynamic nature of economies and markets, government should not give preference or privilege to certain economic players in the technological sector. Although certain policies may only be applicable to certain players, no government action should give preference to a particular technology through redistributive policies. No specific business or technology should be given redistributed dollars that come from the pockets of taxpayers.
Regardless of the perceived economic potential, technology companies shouldn’t be subsidized with taxpayer funds. Technologies should be economically sustainable enough to self-fund by garnering consumer adoption. To use taxpayer dollars is to go outside of the free market and artificially hold up certain technologies. This threatens competition and gives an unbalanced advantage to the politically connected.
7. Although impactful, technological advancement is not sufficient to build and preserve a society.
The defining element of a society is its core values. A strong society must be grounded in the core values of its families, churches, and communities. Technology is a tool to live out those core values in a practical way. In the American context, these core values include a recognition of the God-given basis of freedom, the foundation of the nuclear family as the basic social unit, and an adherence to an objective standard of right and wrong.
Technology by itself is not a force that can cause any meaningful societal improvement. Societal improvement is driven by the practical application of the core values of individuals who strive toward a positive goal. Neither big business nor big government can adequately institute these values.
8. The use and development of technology should be informed by moral principles that uphold the dignity of the individual and the sacredness of civil liberties.
Technology is an incredibly powerful tool. Like all tools, it can be used for good or evil. The proper use of technology should be informed by a moral compass that is grounded in the principle that the rule of law must be informed by moral order and stability.
Given that all individuals have an inherent dignity that is to be honored and respected, technology policy should seek to stop those who use technology for the violation of personal rights. Criminal actors must be discouraged through the enforcement of policies that protect life, liberty, and property. Additionally, any individual who seeks to use technology to exploit others does not provide any lasting benefit to society by these actions, regardless of the economic gains that might come about.
As such, technology in itself is amoral. It is the individuals who use technology that are the moral agents, and it is their actions that have moral consequences. It is the responsibility of civil leaders to acknowledge this distinction and address abuses that come from the immoral use of technology by individuals and institutions.
9. Technology policy should not be used by government as a tool to create or sustain an atmosphere of surveillance, “cancel culture,” intimidation, and censorship.
In recent years, technology has become embedded in our daily lives. Almost every individual action utilizes technology in some way. Thus, there is a real threat from governments and groups wishing to use technology to deprive their fellow citizens of freedom.
Technology policy should not be used as a means to advance governmental control. Additionally, technology policy should not enable the systematic control of ideas by providing unequal protections to the technology sector due its economic resources, academic prowess, social influence, and political capital.
10. At the same time, technological development should be subordinated to the government’s duty to protect liberty from foreign and domestic threats to national security.
Technological advancement is a lesser good as compared to the protection and promotion of individual liberty. The highest duty of the American government is to uphold the order and stability necessary to advance freedom and the core values that have made our nation great. Thus, if a technological development poses a risk to our national defense and security (such as certain kinds of drone technology), this development must be properly managed until an acceptable alternative is found.
In addition, if a violation of individual rights is required in order for technological development to advance, such development should be halted.
Matthew Nicaud is the Tech Policy Specialist at the Mississippi Technology Institute, a division of the Mississippi Center for Public Policy. The website for the Mississippi Technology Institute can be found here: https://mspolicy.org/mississippi-tech-institute/
Several groups from across the country, including the Mississippi Center for Public Policy, have signed a coalition letter making key policy recommendations for broadband spending.
The letter calls on policymakers to ensure that they spend broadband funding in an accountable and responsible way. In the wake of an almost unprecedented amount of federal spending, the coalition calls on policymakers to ensure that they responsibly manage broadband funds by prioritizing areas with the biggest connection gaps.
There have been some calls in Washington to redefine the legal definition of broadband by raising the speed benchmark. The coalition letter urges policymakers not to raise the benchmark when many areas have not even met the prior benchmark yet.
Raising the speed definition for broadband would hurt rural areas as funds would likely be diverted to allow for urban areas to upgrade their speeds to meet the new broadband speed benchmark. This a time that the nation has needed broadband access more than ever before and raising the broadband benchmark would put many rural and suburban communities only further behind as they compete for broadband funds with areas that already have service.
The letter notes:
“With billions of dollars available for broadband and other infrastructure, many densely populated areas with political clout have lobbied for these funds. State lawmakers should ensure broadband funds flow to areas that lack broadband access, as defined as 25 Mbps download and 3 Mbps upload, rather than providing funding for areas that already meet these benchmarks. Expanding access should be lawmakers’ No. 1 priority.”
The letter also makes specific recommendations for policymakers to increase efficiency and lower costs by rejecting government-owned networks, cutting red tape, and pursuing free-market solutions to expanding broadband access. The letter notes again:
“Many of our states have had experiences with costly government owned networks which have done little to expand access or adoption… The money flowing to state coffers is not without limits. States should work to stretch every dollar as far as possible by removing red tape.”
The full text of the letter is available here. It was signed by Tech Policy Specialist, Matthew Nicaud, on behalf of the Mississippi Center for Public Policy and the Mississippi Technology Institute.
Policymakers must treat taxpayer funds with fiscal responsibility and public accountability. The Mississippi Center for Public Policy is proud to support sound policies that uphold the best interests of citizens and pursue real solutions to broadband expansion.
Several types of niche beauty service providers are now free to offer their services in Mississippi without being forced to pay for expensive classes that don’t teach them how to perform their trade. Under a newly enacted state law, eyebrow threaders, eyelash technicians, and makeup artists can open for business without obtaining esthetician licenses.
The new law was prompted by a series of lawsuits against the Mississippi State Board of Cosmetology, including one filed in 2019 by the Mississippi Justice Institute (MJI) and eyebrow threader Dipa Bhattarai, a letter that was sent by MJI and eyelash technician Amy Burks threatening litigation in 2020, and a lawsuit filed by Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP and makeup artist Karrece Stewart in 2020.
“Our clients took legal action to defend one of their most important constitutional rights, the right to earn an honest living in our state without being subjected to pointless and burdensome government regulation,” said Aaron Rice, director of MJI. “Threaders, lash technicians, and makeup artists do not need full-blown esthetician training. They provide safe and simple services. Now these niche beauty providers won’t have to pay thousands of dollars to attend hundreds of hours of classes which are unrelated to their practice.”
Eyebrow Threading
Threading is a very safe and simple technique that allows threading artists to use nothing but twisted cotton thread, acting like a mini-lasso, to remove stray hair, most commonly around the eyebrows. Threading originated in South Asian countries centuries ago, but is growing in popularity in the U.S. because it is an elegant, simple and relatively painless form of hair removal.
In 2013, Mississippi law was amended to require threaders to obtain an esthetician license. But before taking the licensing exam, which does not test the applicant’s knowledge of threading, a would-be threader would have to take 600 hours of classroom instruction at a cost of up to $12,000. And worse, not a single hour of that instruction teaches threading.
Dipa Bhattarai is an international student who has been threading for most of her life. She saw an opportunity to use her skills to pursue the American Dream, and opened a threading studio with locations in Columbus and Starkville and hired four employees. But the cosmetology board shut her down because she did not have an esthetician license.
“I am so grateful that I can get back in business without having to get a completely unnecessary license,” said Bhattarai. “I can focus on my business and my education now without worrying that the government will shut me down.”
Eyelash Extensions
Eyelash extensions are available for purchase in self-adhesive strips at most retail outlets. However, in recent years many customers have started paying lash technicians to apply individual false eyelashes, which results in a more natural look. This is a time-consuming and tedious process, but it is safe and easy to learn.
Mississippi law does not specifically require lash technicians to obtain an esthetician’s license. However, in 2019, the cosmetology board determined that applying eyelash extensions fell within its jurisdiction because it involved beautifying the face. That determination meant that lash technicians would also have to obtain esthetician licenses, despite the fact that the required classroom instruction also did not teach or test on eyelash extension application.
Amy Burks opened an eyelash extension lounge in Madison in 2013 and hired four employees. In 2019, the cosmetology board issued her a citation for operating an unlicensed salon, and said her and all of her employees would have to quit work and attend training.
“I am so thrilled to see this law passed,” said Burks. “My team and I have poured everything we have into this business for the past eight years. To think that it was all going to be taken away was so heartbreaking.”
Makeup Artists
Applying makeup also requires an esthetician license, despite the fact that hundreds of millions of people apply makeup every day without formal training and the fact that makeup instruction is only a very small component of the required classwork, which is mostly focused on skincare and hair removal.
Karrece Stewart started a makeup business in Fulton. She teaches makeup techniques and wants to be able to apply makeup for clients as well. But that would require a license.
“I started my own makeup business, Get Glam Beauty, to pursue my dreams and help give women the confidence they need to see themselves in a different way,” said Stewart. “Mississippi’s unconstitutional licensing requirements for cosmetologists were an obstacle to achieving that dream, but with this change, I will now be able to grow my business, better provide for my family, and use my skills to enhance women’s beauty.”
House Bill 1312
The new law, House Bill 1312, was negotiated by MJI attorneys and Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP with the Mississippi Attorney General’s Office, before being passed by the Mississippi legislature and signed into law by Governor Tate Reeves on Friday, April 9, 2021. The new law took effect immediately.
The new law prohibits the Mississippi State Board of Cosmetology from requiring any type of cosmetology license for persons whose practice is limited to threading, applying eyelash extensions, or makeup artistry. It also prevents the board from imposing fines, civil or criminal penalties on unlicensed threaders, lash technicians, or makeup artists, or regulating the practice of those services.
Everett White, an attorney with the law firm Sones & White, PLLC, served as an MJI volunteer attorney for Ms. Bhattarai.
Andy Taggart, a founding partner of the Taggart, Rimes & Graham law firm, served as an MJI volunteer attorney for Ms. Burks.
MJI Director Aaron Rice is available for interview requests. Please reach out to Hunter Estes via [email protected] to schedule.
The Mississippi Justice Institute is a nonprofit, constitutional litigation center and the legal arm of the Mississippi Center for Public Policy.
“People overestimate what they can accomplish in one legislative session and underestimate what they can accomplish in ten.”
In this series, we are conducting a review of what Mississippi lawmakers have accomplished over the last 10 years. The list provided here is not comprehensive, and we feature only the policies we like: some of which were initiated by MCPP (marked by an *asterisk* below), some of which are good ideas we are happy someone else took the lead on.
In the first part of this series, we reviewed education accomplishments. In this part, we are looking at healthcare. After all, education and healthcare are essentially the two biggest priorities in the state budget. K-12 education is the single largest item in the state budget while healthcare (especially Medicaid) is the single largest item in the total state budget (federal and state revenue).
Healthcare policy in Mississippi over the past 10 years has been shaped largely by Obamacare. Mississippi’s response has mostly been limited to managing the damage.
In 2013, Mississippi became the only state to have its application to set up a state-based insurance exchange rejected by the Obama administration. This rejection, from our perspective, was a huge victory because it forced the administration to set up a federal health insurance exchange. The plan was to delay implementation of Obamacare until Republicans could repeal it … except the repeal never happened.*
At the same time, Mississippi is one of 12 states that has declined to expand Medicaid to able-bodied, working-age adults. This mandate was an original feature of Obamacare until the U.S. Supreme Court struck it down as an unconstitutional overreach by the federal government.* It was bad policy then, it remains bad policy now.
One of the high points of healthcare policy in Mississippi over the past few years has been the steady advance of Right to Try. This law waives federal regulations that often hinder the ability of patients with a terminal illness to take advantage of new medications and technologies. We initiated the first Right to Try law in Mississippi in 2015 (SB 2485). Thanks to the leadership of Senator Josh Harkins, the law was expanded in 2016 (SB 2527) and 2020 (SB 2830), making our Right to Try policies among the best in the country.*
Another high point are protections for direct primary care (SB 2687), passed in 2015. This law helped launch the direct care/concierge care movement in Mississippi. The law clarifies that patients can pay cash to see a doctor, instead of using an insurance plan.*
Mississippi also has one of the better telemedicine systems in place. Telemedicine has made a slow, steady advance in Mississippi over the last 10 years. A bill that would have expanded telemedicine further died in conference in 2021, but it’s likely telemedicine will continue to grow in Mississippi.*
Mississippi Center for Public Policy (MCPP) has announced today that Lesley Davis has requested to step down as its Executive Vice President. After successfully serving as its Interim CEO and then as its EVP after leading the search for the current CEO, she will continue to serve the organization in a policy making role as a member of its Board of Directors.
Announcing the decision, Chairman of the Board, James Herring said “We are incredibly grateful to Lesley for all that she has done to support MCPP; this organization owes her an enormous debt of gratitude. Lesley joined our Board of Directors in February 2019, and took over as Interim CEO in July 2020, leading our Board through an extensive search to find our new President & CEO. Since our new President & CEO arrived in January, Lesley has been of tremendous support in her role as Executive Vice-President and as a member of MCPP’s Board of Directors. We thank Lesley for going above and beyond the call of duty for the past nine months. Her work ethic, skills, knowledge, and passion have helped move this organization forward in our mission of advancing liberty-minded ideals. Having successfully helped steer our organization through this transition, I am delighted that Lesley has decided to remain on the organization’s Board of Directors.”
Douglas Carswell, the newly appointed President & CEO, said “I am tremendously grateful personally for all that Lesley has done to help me transition smoothly into the role of Chief Executive Officer. She has been an incredible EVP to me, and I am sad to see her go. I look forward to continuing to work with her in her role as MCPP Board member.”
“The Mississippi Center for Public Policy exists to advance the cause of liberty and make the moral case for free markets. Lesley has been, and will continue to be, a great advocate for the conservative cause,” Herring said.
“People overestimate what they can accomplish in one legislative session and underestimate what they can accomplish in ten.”
As the 2021 legislative session comes to a close, we’re conducting a review of all that Mississippi lawmakers have accomplished over the last 10 years. All in all, it’s been a very productive period.
In this series we will be providing highlights of policy reforms passed in a range of different areas: Education, Healthcare, Right to Life, Civil Liberty Protections (“God and Guns”), Welfare/Foster Care, Regulatory Reform and Budgeting/Taxes. This list is not comprehensive, and we feature only the laws we like, many of which were initiated by MCPP (marked by an *asterisk* below).
These are the highpoints in education policy over the past 10 years:
Mississippi passed its first charter school law (HB 369) in 2013. The law was updated and improved in 2015 (HB 859) and, again, in 2016 (SB 2161). Mississippi now has six charter schools.*
Also in 2013, the state enacted the third-grade reading gate program, sponsored by Senator Angela Hill (SB 2347). This law prioritizes teaching kids how to read by third grade. We were the 14th state to pass it. Since this law was enacted, Mississippi’s fourth-grade reading scores (on the NAEP) have dramatically improved.*
In 2013, the state also reformed the way it evaluates districts and schools, replacing an inflated system in which a “C” school was labelled “Successful” with the easy-to-understand format of A-B-C-D-F. We were the 14th state in the country to enact this policy (SB 2396).*
Two years later, in 2015, the Legislature passed the Equal Opportunity for Students with Special Needs Act (SB 2695), sponsored by Senator Nancy Collins and championed by Rep. Carolyn Crawford. This law creates a scholarship program that allows children with special needs to attend a private school if that school can better meet their needs. Mississippi was the third state in the nation to enact this kind of program.*
In 2020, Mississippi became the second state in the country to pass an innovative apprenticeship/internship program called Learn to Earn, sponsored by Rep. Kent McCarty (HB 1336). Learn to Earn enables kids in public school to obtain access to high-quality educational opportunities with businesses and nonprofits. *
Also worth mentioning is that lawmakers gave teachers a pay raise in: 2021 ($1,000); 2019 ($1,500); and 2014 ($1,500).
Douglas Carswell, President of the Mississippi Center for Public Policy, joined Ben Shapiro on The Ben Shapiro Show for a wide-ranging discussion on the state of America and what can be done to improve our nation.
The Ben Shapiro Show is syndicated to networks around the country. Ben Shapiro has emerged as a leading conservative voice in today’s age. His site, The Daily Wire, is one of the most popular conservative news outlets in the nation and is regularly read by millions of people.
The full video conversation can be watched here.
Ben and Douglas discussed a plethora of issues including American culture, national spending, the global economy, and more.
Here are some of my personal favorite quotes from the conversation:
Ben Shapiro: “Welcome to our shores. I’ve got to say, it feels like you’re arriving at a rather inauspicious time in American history. While the economy seems to be finally recovering as COVID lets up, that is not stopping the current government from blowing out spending to an unprecedented extent and radically shifting the thinking of how government and the individual ought to interact.”
Douglas Carswell: “The United States has been the world’s number one power for 120 years and it’s been, by and large, an extraordinary 120 years, the best in human existence.”
Douglas: “If America becomes just another country, the lights would go out not just in America, the lights would go out on the world.”
Ben: “Europe had the privilege of having the United States basically hold up the world economy and much of their defense budget for half a century. Nobody’s going to be holding up the foundations here if the United States goes.”
Douglas: “The essence of modernity, the essence of civilization, is that we judge people not on the basis of immutable characteristics.”
Douglas: “If America was built on hatred and racism then why is it that people from every color, and every creed, and every culture want to come here?”
Resolutions have been filed in the Mississippi House and Senate opposing the controversial concept of “Critical Race Theory.”
House Concurrent Resolution 62 and House Concurrent Resolution 87 both make clear their opposition to critical race theory. These resolutions were introduced by Representatives Chris Brown, Dan Eubanks, and Dana Criswell. Senate Resolution 56 deals with the same issue and was introduced by Senator Angela Hill.
Critical Race Theory has its roots in academia. It has been festering in the halls of our colleges and universities for decades but has only recently taken on a new energy as its students have entered public life in institutions across the nation.
Its core teaching is that people are separated into classifications of “oppressed” and “oppressor.” It categorizes America as a fundamentally racist country whose every institution is designed to maintain white supremacy, and thus it concludes that those institutions must be overthrown.
The Theory erases the notions of personal responsibility and individual liberty. It crushes the agency and dignity that is unique to each person and ascribes the results of one’s life to the color of his or her skin.
The Heritage Foundation created a brief overview of the Theory and its implications here.
The House and Senate resolutions cite the Declaration of Independence, the Gettysburg Address, and the 14th Amendment before lambasting the foundational teachings of critical race theory.
The resolutions state that, “critical race theory and related ideologies propagate divisive and untrue concepts that teach one race or sex is inherently superior to another and that individuals of one race or sex should be deprived of basic rights simply because of their race or sex.”
They further note that, “it is contrary to the laws of God and nature that an individual’s moral character is necessarily determined by his or her race or sex and that individuals should thus be discriminated against in the classroom, the workplace or any public forum or place.”
The resolutions will now have the chance to be considered by the Mississippi House and Senate over the coming days.