The COVID-19 pandemic has demonstrated the need to update Mississippi’s K-12 education funding model, in particular the way that the school finance formula counts students.

Mississippi differs from most states in the fact that they currently use an average daily attendance (ADA) model to count kids. This way of counting students is not all bad, but the COVID-19 pandemic has brought to light the already existing deficiencies of the ADA model and some Mississippi school districts are at risk of losing a significant amount of funding because their ADA has declined during the COVID-19 outbreak.

Surprising variation exists in how states measure public school enrollment. These measurements are important because they ultimately affect how education dollars are allocated to students and schools. Every way of counting kids  comes with important tradeoffs: some are more accurate than others; some impose a greater administrative burden; others result in more budget stability. This commentary will survey the current student counting methods used across states and make policy recommendations that Mississippi policymakers could employ to address funding shortfalls resulting from a decline in ADA counts.

Key Considerations: Accuracy, Predictability and Budget Stability

There are some key considerations states make when they take different approaches to counting students. Keep in mind that there are drawbacks to each of these considerations.

The first priority for legislators weighing different student count methodologies should be accuracy. Accuracy is the key to fair funding insofar as the entire point of counting student enrollment is to correlate enrollment with funding. To be funded, a student must be counted.

To the extent that any other factors obscure the principle that funding should be determined by the true number of students a district currently has enrolled, inequities will emerge. Concerns over accuracy and funding equity are the reason some states opt to use average daily membership (ADM). This way of counting differs from ADA in that ADM averages student enrollment numbers—rather than attendance numbers—over much of the school year. Enrollment is considered more accurate in this case because it counts the number of students a district expects to serve, not the number that show up on a given day. North Carolina, Tennessee, and West Virginia, along with many other states, use ADM.

Second, there is generally some acknowledgement that school districts must be able to reliably craft their yearly budgets. If state funding varies too much over the course of a year due to attendance fluctuations , districts won’t be able to make confident hiring or programmatic decisions. If, as it’s generally assumed, student bodies are largest at the beginning of a semester, districts must structure their staffing and budgets without good knowledge of which students and how many of them will end up withdrawing. These budget concerns are the reason some states use single-day enrollment counts at the beginning of the year (Colorado, Maryland, Massachusetts) or at only several points over the course of the year (Georgia, South Carolina, Louisiana).

A third key consideration for state lawmakers when deciding on a student counting system is that districts struggle to adjust their cost structures when student bodies are changing substantially over a short span of years. When student bodies are shrinking or growing rapidly, districts must make long-term decisions about consolidating or expanding school facilities. With staffing, they often can only downsize through attrition when populations are shrinking. Likewise, schools face additional hiring costs when student populations are growing. Because these long-term investments take time and often lag behind the speed at which student populations are changing, some states (Maine, Nevada, North Carolina) allow districts to incorporate older or projected student counts so that they have a financial cushion to accommodate substantial increases or decreases in student populations.

Lastly, many state policymakers believe funding decisions should emphasize school attendance metrics. Under this model, the reigning assumption is that time spent in a physical classroom directly translates into student achievement. A primary rationale for the small number of states (Mississippi, California, Illinois) that count students through attendance, rather than enrollment, is that they want to encourage districts to get students in their classrooms.

Click here to read the rest of this report.

In a surprising move, Facebook has now taken down the SuperTalk Mississippi Facebook page. According to SuperTalk, the supposed violation occurred when the page shared news of an update from Governor Tate Reeves regarding new vaccine appointments.

Paul Gallo, host of SuperTalk’s Paul Gallo Show, stated in a tweet today, “Breaking! SuperTalk Facebook has been pulled for the reasons attached. Seems we committed a violation for sharing a story from the Governor’s office pertaining to expanded vaccines available for appointments.”

The move raises serious questions about Facebook’s community standards and its algorithm for determining potential violations. SuperTalk was distributing important news about vaccine appointment updates to the public. Now, the station that helps to provide news to the entire state, has been restricted from doing so.

This effort unfortunately censors SuperTalk for the time being from being able to distribute news on one of the largest online platforms. Furthermore, this move produces a dangerous potential chilling effect on speech. How many other news providers, influencers, or everyday Facebook users might think twice before a post in fear of similarly being shut down?

Multiple state officials spoke out against the move from Facebook. Governor Tate Reeves tweeted, “Unbelievable! Please fix quickly, @Facebook. Local news outlets like @SuperTalk are essential, and they should not be punished by big tech companies for simply sharing important vaccine information!”

Attorney General Lynn Fitch noted in a tweet, “Big tech is an elite, unelected, and unchecked group that should not have the power to silence and erase anyone. We don’t lose our First Amendment rights just because the town square has moved online.”

The move is likely to bring renewed scrutiny of the tech giant in Mississippi. Several bills in the Legislature address the growing issue of social media giants, like Facebook and Twitter, censoring speech.  These include bills by Rep. Becky Currie (HB 151) and Sen. Angela Hill (SB 2617).

Hopefully SuperTalk’s page will be quickly restored and substantial actions will be taken to ensure this doesn’t happen again.

In our Tech Talks series, we engage with tech leaders, policymakers, and entrepreneurs to discuss the tech world in the Magnolia state and promote public engagement on key tech issues.

For this edition of Tech Talks, we are featuring state Senator Scott DeLano. Senator DeLano serves as the Technology Committee chairman and the vice-chairman of the Veterans and Military Affairs Committee.

Let’s hear from Senator DeLano …

• Matthew: Can you tell me a little bit about yourself and your role as the chairman of the Senate Technology Committee?

I have served in the Mississippi Legislature for the last 12 years. After having spent ten years in the state House, I was elected to the state senate.

When I served in the House, Speaker Philip Gunn originally appointed me to be the Constitution Committee chairman. I also served as the Appropriations Subcommittee chairman for ITS, MDA and MEMA. In these roles, I found that I worked on a lot of technical questions, so the Technology Committee was created to facilitate these technical matters more effectively. I served in this capacity for the remainder of my time in the House.

In 2019, I successfully ran for an open Senate seat in Harrison County. Upon my arrival in the Senate, the Lieutenant Governor appointed me to be the chairman of the newly created Technology Committee, with a key focus on the modernization of technology services for state agencies. However, the committee is also intended to address tech issues that impact the private sector in the state. This is a significant part of the committee’s purpose as well.

• Matthew: What are some key tech legislation issues that were covered by the legislature in 2020 and being considered for 2021?

One important issue that we worked on last year is computer science in public education. The legislature is working on creating a clear pathway for computer science and technology classes to be taught in every public-school district in the state. The main element of this entails integrating computer science courses into existing school course curriculum. This is a significant issue that we are working on in the Education Committee.

A second priority was emergency communications as it relates to Next Generation 9-1-1. This program brings internet communications into the dispatches across the state and insures all 911 service fees collected go to the benefit of each county’s Emergency Communication District.

Currently, our first responders are primarily limited to telephone traffic. They cannot currently integrate communications, such as texting and other forms, into 9-1-1 emergency calls. For example, we have technologies such as wireless help buttons for the elderly and telehealth video options. We want to integrate these technologies into our existing emergency dispatch systems.  

These two issues that we worked on last year will be a priority in 2021, as well. However, this is just the beginning. We are looking to explore what further reforms we can make to encourage tech advancements in the state.

• Matthew: Much of the current conversation in the state relates to the issue of broadband internet access. What are some goals that legislators have in regard to broadband and the effective management of the funds allocated for broadband?

During the 2020 session, the legislature passed several bills that directed over $250 million dollars from the CARES act that focused on expanding broadband availability throughout the state. For instance, the legislature appropriated matching funds for Electric Cooperative Associations that yielded over 150 million dollars in new broadband infrastructure development to unserved areas of rural Mississippi. In a separate appropriation, we provided over $100 million dollars to provide laptop computers and connectivity to all public and private schools in the state.  We are tracking these funds to make sure that these funds are used properly. This includes following up with the recipients of the funds, reviewing the recipients' use of the funds, and ensuring that the funds are actually accomplishing their intended purpose.

I have made it one of my key priorities to engage in discussions with fellow legislators about the best allocation and application of these funds. These are significant amounts of money. The legislature has a duty to ensure that these funds are utilized in a fiscally responsible way.

• Matthew: Does the Legislature have any policy objectives that will help prevent new technologies from being smothered by outdated regulatory policies?

One of my roles as the Technology Committee chairman is to help give the state the best opportunity to attract new businesses by ensuring that we are very cautious not to stymie innovation in the marketplace.

Just as one example, automobile manufacturers such as Nissan and Toyota are developing innovative technologies such as automatic lane correction and autonomous driving right here in our State. But the development of these safety features requires tests to be conducted and data to be collected. There have been laws passed in several states that would prohibit some of this data from being collected. I am very careful, and I think our state should be very careful, not to pass legislation that could prevent innovative research and development.  We want to create a balanced regulatory environment that is optimal for us to attract companies and businesses, jobs, and prosperity into our state. This balance is critical to protect the public from harm while protecting the economy from crippling regulations. This is essential in helping Mississippi to grow.

• Matthew: What are some obstacles to tech that your committee has considered?

You would be surprised at how much of a barrier different interpretations of language and terminology pose. For example, what is defined as broadband in an urbanized area of the state may have a completely different meaning than what is acceptable broadband in rural Mississippi. The technical terminology differences can be challenging to lawmakers who are trying to apply this terminology to their constituents' needs. To remedy this issue, we have had to do a lot of clarification on definitions and meaning.

• Matthew: As the Technology Committee chairman, what technological future do you see for Mississippi?

As a committee chairman, I stay informed on tech issues around the country. I provide a point of reason and knowledge for the legislature. It is our goal to implement successful policies from states all over the country. I want to see these policies custom-tailored to encourage prosperity in Mississippi.

This technologically-driven prosperity should be encouraged by passing legislation that gets government out of the way and lets the free market take the lead. By pursuing this path, we want to foster innovation, because it is innovation that provides the cutting-edge technologies that will be required to drive our economy in the future. It will be exciting to see what lies ahead for our state.

Senator Scott DeLano is the Chairman of the Mississippi Senate Technology Committee.

Matthew Nicaud is the Tech Policy Analyst at MCPP and your host for Tech Talks.

The Magnolia state might be one of the most wonderful places to live, but there is no getting round the fact that it has some of the worst health outcomes in the country.

According to the Legatum Institute’s Prosperity Index, Mississippi ranks 49^th out of 50 states in terms of health outcomes, health systems, and illness and risk factors.

“That’s easy to fix” some are now saying. “We just need to hose federal funds at the problem”.  When it comes to health care, one thing Mississippi does not lack are those calling for us to accept federal funding to expand Medicaid.

Under the Obama administration’s Affordable Care Act, a number of states have already gone down that road, turning Medicaid – which was designed to provide health insurance coverage to low income seniors and mothers, and those with disabilities - into a system of generalized healthcare.  Should we do the same?

No.  Expanding Medicaid would be extremely costly, without necessarily improving health outcomes.  Spraying federal funds in our direction does not mean that the money will end up going where it is actually needed.  Another large handout from DC would likely hinder, not help, the chances of us achieving the kind of health reforms we actually need.

Pouring millions of dollars of federal funds into Mississippi’s health system sounds attractive, but you won’t be surprised to learn that it comes with a price tag; a $100 million a year price tag, according to recent estimates.

Who, it seems reasonable to ask, would have to pay that?

One way of generating an additional $100 million a year in revenue from tax-paying Mississippians would be to raise personal income tax or tax businesses even more.  But Mississippi already has one of the heaviest state and local tax burdens of any state in America, and it is hard to see how our fragile economy could cope with an additional hike. 

Some have suggested that we could find this additional $100 million a year from the hospitals.  No plan I have yet seen has identified a way of conjuring up that kind of money without hospitals ultimately bumping up their costs to their patients.

I can see why some hospitals might be quite attracted to the idea of raising an additional $100 million a year from their patients, and in return getting a large dollop of federal funding thrown in their direction.  But I can’t quite see what is in it for those hundreds of thousands of families in Mississippi who work hard to provide health care coverage for their families, who would find themselves being asked to provide even more – so other folk could get coverage for free.

If we want better health outcomes, we should not think only in terms of how much money we spend on health care.  We need to think about the way that our health care system converts that money into improved outcomes for patients.

One low cost thing we could do would be to repeal laws that unnecessarily push up health costs, such as the 1979 Health Care Certificate of Need (CON) Law.  This legislation means that it is illegal today in Mississippi for hospitals or other healthcare providers to expand their health care services without first getting a permit, known as a certificate of need.

It’s not just that permission is needed.  The way our restrictive system works is that permission is often needed from established health care providers.  They can file objections that keep the matter tied up, often for years.  It is as if Papa John’s had to give approval before Domino Pizza was allowed to open a new restaurant in your neighborhood.

Additionally, rules on telemedicine mean that Mississippians are presently prevented from accessing health care online – unless the doctor they are dealing with happens to have Mississippi licensure. 

Why can Mississippians not deal with a doctor from Birmingham or Memphis?  Is what comprises good medical care different there?  Of course not.  The rules governing who can provide health care have been written in a way that hinders competition and limits choices, and is holding health care back for Mississippians.

These type of restrictions mean that instead of a free market in health care, with different providers competing to give patients services at a price they can afford, we have a rigged market.  The rules are written to keep new entrants out, which in turn leaves prices high and customers captive. This, not a failure to sign up to Obamacare, is one of the reasons why Mississippi does not have better health outcomes. 

Without reforming the way that our health system operates, throwing hundreds of millions of dollars at our state Medicaid system is not going to make things better. 

The secret to good legislation is much like the secret to making good, healthy food. Follow the recipe, use the right ingredients, and leave out the bad stuff. Unfortunately, there's a lot of junk that gets cooked up in the Legislature these days.

The Mississippi Center for Public Policy uses its Legislative Tracker to grade and analyze all legislation that makes its way out of committee. Recognizing this, we thought it would be appropriate to offer a clear and concise statement regarding the principles that go into evaluating legislation.

Bill analysis conducted by the Mississippi Center for Public Policy utilizes specific criteria to determine the nature, where possible, and the essential features of proposed legislation in relation to its potential impact on freedom and liberty in the state of Mississippi.

If the answer is YES to any of the guiding questions stated beneath the enumerated criteria provided below, then the proposed legislation is identified as BAD POLICY for Mississippians within our Legislative Tracker.

CRITERIA:

1. Individual liberty
   • Would the proposed legislation, if enacted, encroach upon individual liberty?
     • Would the proposed legislation, if enacted, ALSO apply state statutes in a manner that is inconsistent with our nation’s founding principles?
2. Scope of government
   • Would the proposed legislation, if enacted, expand the scope of government beyond its original purpose as outlined by our founding documents at either the federal or state level?
3. Transparency and Accountability
   • Would the proposed legislation, if enacted, decrease transparency and/or accountability in government at any level or in any bureaucratic/administrative agency or its functions?
4. Taxes
   • Would the proposed legislation, if enacted, increase taxes?
     • Would the proposed legislation, if enacted, ALSO result in a net deficit to individual liberty and/or increase the scope of government beyond its original purpose?
5. Regulations
   • Would the proposed legislation, if enacted, create new unnecessary restrictions that limit our economic growth and unfairly restrict our personal liberties?
   • Would the proposed legislation, if enacted, amend existing unnecessary restrictions that limit our economic growth and unfairly restrict our personal liberties in a manner that sustains and/or increases the existing restrictions?
6. Personal Responsibility
   • Would the proposed legislation, if enacted, reduce personal responsibility or create a government solution to a personal issue?
7. Strong Families
   • Would the proposed legislation, if enacted, weaken families in any way whatsoever?
8. God-Given Dignity of All Human Beings
   • Would the proposed legislation, if enacted, harm the unborn in any way whatsoever or encourage prospective mothers to choose death for their unborn child?

Senator Jeremy England gave a vigorous defense of a piece of legislation that he has authored in a post published to Facebook. Senate Bill 2342 would exempt certain beauty services from licensing and registration requirements, thus reducing the stranglehold that the Board of Cosmetology has over these workers.

Many have called into question the need for hundreds of hours and potentially thousands of dollars spent on training that often does not even apply to an individual’s chosen profession. For example, while an EMT needs 150 class hours, an eyebrow threader in Mississippi must take 600 expensive class hours and not a single moment of these lessons focuses on eyebrow threading.

The fact is that rules like this one are often focused not on health and safety, but on producing a barrier to entry. Thus, obstacles are developed that help to ensure that less people try to join the industry and less competition exists for current providers.

In August 2019, Aaron Rice, Director of the Mississippi Justice Institute, the legal arm of MCPP, filed a lawsuit on behalf of Dipa Bhattarai in a federal district court. The lawsuit was filed against the Cosmetology Board.

Eyebrow threading is a safe and simple technique that uses just a single strand of cotton thread to remove unwanted hair. It does not involve skin-to-skin contact between the threading artist and customer, does not reuse the same tools on different customers, and does not involve the use of sharp implements, harsh chemicals, or heat.

Regarding this legislation from Senator England, MJI Director Aaron Rice stated, “[w]e have been fighting in court for years to protect the rights of niche beauty service providers to earn an honest living without burdensome and irrelevant licensing requirements.”

Rice continued, “[t]his legislation would solve that problem and allow more Mississippians to use their skills and abilities to provide for themselves and their families.”

In his Facebook post, Senator England noted, “[t]he Cosmetology Board in Mississippi is one of many, many departments and agencies we have in this state that requires licenses to perform certain tasks legally. In other words, if you want to do a job in Mississippi that you may be capable of doing and talented enough to earn a living doing, the Board will not give you a license unless and until you pay for a huge amount of training hours and schooling. This is VERY restrictive. I'm not saying it is not helpful, and I'm not saying that those hours in a classroom learning how to perform certain tasks aren't valuable.”

“But in a state like Mississippi, where we have a very low labor market participation rate and have a large population of individuals that feel stuck in a job with low pay, we have to reverse course on restricting people from doing jobs. It has to start somewhere - and the Board of Cosmetology is that start for me.”

“I want you to be able to earn a living and embark on the American Dream of starting a business where you have a chance to succeed (or fail). I want to help you support your family on your own, which may also help you get off and away from government assistance.”

“I don't want a Board that will require a large number of hours in a classroom learning things that have nothing to do with your selected trade, and I don't want you to be forced to take out tens of thousands of dollars in student loans in the process. That hurts people right where it counts, and it keeps them from succeeding. I am and will always be against this practice.”

“I want people to be able to work, and I don't want a government agency putting up roadblocks to prevent them from working. This is my belief as a conservative - and it is a big reason why I am here in Jackson. I am a small government guy. Deregulation is a major part of the foundation of small government, conservative principles. I ran on these principles, and I promised to be faithful to them.”

Senator Jeremy England has stepped up to the plate to support Mississippi entrepreneurs. His passionate defense of the American dream and an individual’s right to work without a government agency getting in his or her way is worth highlighting and supporting.

One of the many significant challenges that have arisen since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic is the threat of running out of ICU (Intensive Care Unit) beds. This issue is important because the inability to treat severely ill patients on an effective and timely basis unnecessarily increases the incidence of lasting complications or death.

In addition, if COVID does consume all available beds, patients with other critical care needs (e.g., heart attack, stroke, pneumonia, etc.) may be underserved due to capacity limitations. Following are findings on whether Mississippi has sufficient ICU beds and an examination of one of the causes of the potential shortage: outdated Certificate of Need (CON) laws.

Last November, the media increasingly reported that ICU beds were at maximum capacity in Jackson, the state’s capitol and largest city. The State Health Officer, Dr. Thomas Dobbs, tweeted: “Zero ICU beds in Jackson. Very few elsewhere. Please protect yourself and your family.” In July, headlines similarly raised the alarm that “Mississippi’s five largest hospitals are out of ICU beds.” Likewise, in August, we were told that Mississippi’s largest hospital (UMMC) was “negative 14 ICU beds.”

As of January 16, 2021, the Mississippi Department of Health (MDoH) stated that there were 2,680 new reported COVID-19 cases and 70 deaths, bringing the total since June 21, 2020, to 250,869 cases and 5,481 deaths. For the same period, MDoH reported that there were 885 total adult ICU beds, 332 adult COVID patients in ICU, and 65 available adult ICU beds. That means that coronavirus patients were taking up 37.51 percent of all adult ICU beds.

If we go by these news reports and the official data, it seems clear Mississippi is suffering from a shortage of ICU beds. When we look at the big picture, however, questions arise. For instance, in 2019, the Harvard Global Health Institute found that Mississippi had 931 ICU beds available. Short of actually losing the health care professionals needed to operate the ICU beds, it’s worth asking how the total number of ICU beds decreased from 931 in 2019 to 885 on January 16, 2021.

According to the Kaiser Family Foundation’s 2018 study on the total number of hospital beds per 1,000 people in every state, Mississippi had 4.0 beds per 1,000. That is the fourth highest number of hospital beds in the country (the national average is 2.4) followed by North Dakota (4.3); the District of Columbia (4.4); and South Dakota (4.8). Further, Becker’s Hospital Review reported in 2019 that the Kaiser Family Foundation found that Mississippi ranked 7th in the nation for states with the most rural health clinics (186 clinics). There are so many rural clinics in Mississippi that, according to a Mississippi Today article, rural clinics are on the verge of shutting down because of low patient volumes.

Of course, ICU beds and standard hospital beds (not to mention rural health clinics) are not equivalent. ICU beds have more specialized equipment and accompanying staff. However, it does seem that we are better off than most states in terms of the number of ICU and standard hospital beds. Yet, according to Johns Hopkins University’s COVID-19 Mortality Analysis, the United States has a case-fatality ratio of 1.7 percent. In Mississippi, the case fatality ratio is 2.18 percent.

Presuming COVID is the immediate cause of an ICU bed shortage, there are other health care policy factors at play: one of which is Certificate of Need (CON) laws.

In Mississippi, a CON is a law that requires current and potential medical providers to apply to the MDoH in order to expand existing medical facilities, purchase new medical machines, and build new hospitals/health care practices. This requirement, even with an emergency CON process in place, discourages new and existing health care providers from opening facilities to expand medical services and access.

The rationale behind a CON is to ensure that there isn’t an overabundance of medical services/facilities offered within the same area, the idea being that too much competition could drive providers out of business. The first CON law was passed in New York in 1964. In 1974, Congress accelerated the process by tying federal funding to CON health care planning regulations, with the result that every state, except Louisiana, had passed a CON law by 1982.

In a sudden turn of events, the federal CON requirements (and funding) were repealed only five years later. This repeal marks one of the rare occasions when the federal government has retreated from a new regulatory regime and funding structure, suggesting that the economic theory behind CON state planning is, to put it simply, erroneous. Similarly, recent research confirms that CON laws contribute to fewer hospitals per capita.

Since the beginning of the COVID-19 outbreak, 20 states have suspended CON laws, with several others enacting emergency CON provisions. To date, Mississippi has not. This alone is a powerful reminder that CON restrictions are inhibiting health care access, sometimes with fatal consequences.

In conclusion, the limited data available shows that there is a shortage of ICU beds in Mississippi. The coronavirus accounts for 37.51 percent of ICU bed utilization. No data is available to break down the remainder of ICU bed utilization. Repealing or suspending Mississippi’s archaic CON laws, however, would surely help meet the urgent needs of Mississippians.

Sean Singel holds a Master of Public Health from Texas A&M University and a BS from Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center.  His policy interests lie in clinical practice, health insurance, health care administration, and general health policy. Sean enjoys hiking, reading, and spending time with friends and family.

The Mississippi Center for Public Policy has appointed Hunter Estes as the Director of Communications. In his new role, Estes will oversee and coordinate all marketing and outreach efforts for the organization including social media output, press relations, video production, and more.

Regarding the appointment, Estes stated, “I am incredibly excited to take on this new role. It has become increasingly important to elevate a rejuvenated and vigorous defense of the freedoms that bind us as Mississippians. In order to successfully push for liberty-minded policies that advance prosperity for our state, we must win the battle of ideas and that all starts with effective communications strategies.”

MCPP President Douglas Carswell noted, “Hunter understands how communication has changed and is brilliant at getting our message out to a mass audience. We are honored to have him leading our outreach efforts.”

Carswell continued, “For our organization, outreach means having a hearts and minds strategy. To move the dial in Mississippi, we need to reach out and make the moral case for free markets and limited government to the rising generation. With Hunter in this role, we will.”

Estes has served as the development manager for the organization since January of 2019. In this role, he coordinated all fundraising efforts by communicating with donors, working with foundation partners, and developing a range of new programs including the expansion of digital donation opportunities and the launch of the 1798 Society, our major donors club.

Estes also serves as a community leader on the board of the Jackson chapter of America’s Future (previously America’s Future Foundation), a networking organization for liberty-minded young professionals. Furthermore, Estes joined the Mississippi Army National Guard in October of 2020.

Before moving to Mississippi, Estes worked as an intern under former Speaker Paul Ryan, former Speaker Newt Gingrich, Senator Ted Cruz, the House Energy and Commerce Committee, and the Chamber of Commerce Foundation.

He holds his Bachelor of Science in International Relations from Georgetown University’s Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service.

For comments or questions about the appointment, please reach out to Hunter Estes at [email protected].

Part I: The 2009 ARRA

Over the past 10 years, hundreds of millions of federal dollars have flooded into Mississippi with the stated aim of extending broadband Internet connectivity into underserved and unserved, mostly rural areas of the state. It is vital that the distribution and use of these monies be subject to close scrutiny. The federal funds themselves were drawn out of thin air via deficit spending, so it is doubly important that the real-world return on these massive investments (which are being replicated nationwide) be maximized and any potential for misuse, abuse, or waste minimized.

Federal dollars for rural broadband first flowed into Mississippi and around the nation via the 2009 American Restoration and Reinvestment Act (the Obama stimulus). The total was nearly $110 million ($133 million adjusted for inflation 2020). A decade later, theCoronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act of 2020 would bring another $1.25 billion into Mississippi. State lawmakers earmarked $275 million of that money to broadband and distance learning, with $75 million going to rural electric cooperatives and privately owned rural Internet providers (via a dollar for dollar matching grant).

Of the 2009 money, more than $70 million was allocated to the Mississippi Education, Safety and Health Network (MESHNet) project to deploy a 700-megahertz interoperable public safety wireless broadband network to every public safety agency in the state.

Another $32 million was administered by a contractor, Contact Network, Inc., for two projects.  The South Central Mississippi Broadband Infrastructure Project intended to build 635 miles of fiber optic middle mile broadband infrastructure and lease another 223 miles of existing commercial fiber. These two efforts sought to expandhigh-speed Internet access in underserved areas of 16 counties in southern and central Mississippi.

The Mississippi Delta Broadband Infrastructure Project was approved to deploy a 550-mile broadband middle mile network throughout 12 Delta counties. This was to enable community anchor institutions to complete a fiber network with the capacity to upgrade with increased demand. A second objective was to connect 16 public school districts to facilitate distance learning, video conferencing, and improved school security.

The fourth project funded through the National Telecommunications and Information Administration allocated $7.2 million to support creation and operation of the Mississippi Broadband Connect Coalition, a nonprofit public-private partnership focused on producing a comprehensive statewide strategic plan for improving digital literacy, increasing access to broadband, and enabling greater adoption of broadband in Mississippi.

The Quest for Universal Internet Access

Mississippi has been singled out as one of the worst states in the nation for Internet access and, especially, for failing to provide access to largely poor rural citizens. When you dig deeper, the picture is more complicated, especially in considering actual broadband adoption rates by households who already have access to broadband. (In fact, some people live happily without broadband and don’t choose to purchase it even when it is available.)

BroadbandSearch.net says a startling 41 percent have no Internet connectivity – the highest rate in the nation. Yet the firm also states that nearly all (statistically 100 percent) of Mississippi residents have access to wireless Internet, 87.3 percent can get DSL service, 67.8 percent can get cable Internet, and 21.5 percent have fiber Internet as a choice.  Over half of Mississippians have at least three Internet service providers to choose from.

Broadband Now, which has been manually collecting plan and pricing data from all U.S. Internet service providers every month since 2015, reports that Mississippi is currently among the 10 worst states for broadband access due to the relatively low statewide average download speed of 84.5 Mbps (thousand bytes per second) and the fact that over 16 percent of people remain without access to a high-speed wired broadband connection of 25 Mbps or faster, Yet, they state that 40 percent now have access to fiber optic service, which is well above the national average.  This contrast may be explained by current federal practice, which prioritizes broadband speed over broadband coverage.

Broadband Now also states that some Mississippi counties have widespread broadband coverage while others have less than 50 percent coverage. The bottom line:

• Some 368,000 people in Mississippi out of an estimated 3 million residents do not have access to a wired Internet connection capable of 25 Mbps download speeds;
• 258,000 have NO available wired Internet provider;
• Another 236,000 have access to only a single provider.

These are significant numbers, but they do not tell the whole story.

One in 10 Americans do not use the Internet at all, with the elderly and high school dropouts most likely not to go online. The largest group of Internet nonusers are people who believe the Internet is not relevant to their lives or that it infringes on their privacy. Recently imposed restrictions by providers on Internet content, as well as questions about the extent to which schools are teaching various radical ideologies, may be signaling that a battle is coming about how government-funded Internet could be used to shape the hearts and minds of Internet users.

Another Pew Research report indicates that, “Only 36% of rural adults say the government should provide subsidies to help low-income Americans purchase high-speed home internet service, compared with 50% of urban residents and 43% of suburbanites.”

That said, in some rural areas, wireless Internet is both costly and interruptible. The lockdowns, lockouts, and home-based work and education brought about in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic has provided a new sense of urgency to get the entire state “wired.”

The ARRA Brings Federal Dollars to the Broadband Buildout in Mississippi

Back in 2008, a Pew Research study found that “broadband adoption in the United States continues to exhibit steady growth,” with 55 percent of Americans having a high-speed Internet connection at home, up from 45 percent a year earlier. Another 10 percent had dial-up connections. The study also found stagnant growth in usage for low-income and African-American households, but rapid growth among Americans ages 50-64 and among suburban and rural Americans. Still, only 38 percent of rural Americans had broadband at home in 2008.

It is thus not surprising that, during his campaign to win the White House, then-Senator Barack Obama listed broadband rollout to rural areas as one of his top priorities. At the time, Congress was approving the Broadband Data Improvement Act, which directed the Federal Communications Commission to compile a list of geographical areas in the U.S. lacking any “advanced telecommunications” provider and to include population and per capita income data for each area.

Shortly after his election, President Obama included $7.2 billion for rural broadband in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, the giant stimulus bill intended to jumpstart the nation out of the doldrums of the “Great Recession.” Distribution of the funds was split between the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Rural Utility Service ($2.5 billion) and the National Telecommunications and Information Administration ($4.7 billion). Nearly $110 million in ARRA funding came through NTIA to various projects in Mississippi.(The specific distributions to Mississippi entities from the Rural Utilities Service out of its ARRA allocation are still being researched.)

Obama’s commitment to public funding for rural broadband expansion was met with optimism in many quarters. Verizon official Link Hoewing encouraged grants to states to map out areas where broadband was not available, adding that “relatively small investments in broadband can encourage substantial returns in economic growth, new jobs, and innovation.”

But a 2011 paper by Jeffrey Eisenach and Kevin Caves confirmed prior research that had indicated that RUS broadband subsidy programs funded by the ARRA “were not cost effective and often funded duplicative coverage in areas already served by existing providers.” As Nick Schulz reported in Forbes, Eisenach and Caves looked at three areas that received stimulus funds, in the form of loans and direct grants, to expand broadband access in southwestern Montana, northwestern Kansas, and northeastern Minnesota.

In these three areas, where the median household income at the time was no higher than $51,000 and the median home price no higher than $189,000, the RUS-subsidized projects spent a whopping $394,234 per household, over twice the high-end median home price and nearly eight times the high-end median household income. A $49 million project in the state of Montana, in an area with only seven households lacking at least 3G Internet wireless, was the biggest boondoggle.

In the years following, broadband penetration in the United States continued its rapid expansion across the country. By 2018, roughly three-fourths of American adults had broadband Internet service at home and 90 percent were Internet users.

Even so, Pew Research found again that racial minorities, older adults, rural residents, and those with lower levels of education and income were less likely to have broadband service at home. These statistics, however, did not take into account that about 20 percent of American adults, largely younger adults, non-whites, and lower-income Americans, had become “smartphone-only” Internet users.

As the Mississippi Broadband Connect Coalition was winding down its federally funded activities in 2013, Jason Dean, then its managing director [he is now President of the State Board of Education], said regarding broadband availability in Mississippi: “There’s a lot of coverage if you take in cable and cell phones, but we’re trying to get more people to use it. Education, health care, government services, and workforce training have to create demand drivers.”

A 2015 order from the Obama Federal Communications Commission overturned laws in 19 states that had prevented local governments from attempting to build out and compete with privately held broadband networks. In the aftermath of that action, the Mississippi legislature enacted the Mississippi Broadband Enabling Act of 2019, overturning a 1942 state regulation that prevented electric cooperatives from offering anything other than electricity to their members. 

Part II of this report will discuss the Mississippi Broadband Enabling Act and the politics behind that. Stay tuned.