The 2020 Census results have arrived, and the facts are in. Mississippi was one of only three states (alongside Illinois and West Virginia) to lose population in the last ten years.
While we may not have lost a seat in the House of Representatives, we did not grow. When one looks around the country at the states that are prospering and expanding, it becomes quite clear that there is a plethora of natural economic growth driving their success.
In these states, new businesses are not just brought in on the back of taxpayer funded grants and subsidies. They are instead attracted to the strength of the workforce that is present, the friendly tax and regulatory environments, and the hubs of opportunity.
Patrick Gleason, the Vice President of State Affairs at Americans for Tax Reform noted that, “[t]he average top personal income tax rate for states losing seats in Congress is 6.5%, which is 46% greater than the average top income tax rate for states gaining seats (4.45%).”
The states that gained the largest share of the population, and with this, more congressional seats, have some of the best tax structures in the country. Florida has no income tax. Texas has no income tax. Montana has no sales or local taxes and low property taxes. Colorado has a taxpayer bill of rights that makes it very difficult to impose additional tax burdens on state residents.
Much of our population loss is driven by millennials departing the state. It has been reported that Mississippi is losing this generation of residents faster than any state in the country. The departure of our younger population is especially terrible as it reflects not only lost citizens, but a lost investment, as much of this population attended public schools and then colleges in Mississippi, only to take themselves elsewhere.
We will not be able to grow as a state, until we overcome the hurdle that we have in incentivizing folks to stay. After all, if many young people are trying to leave, why would new people be inclined to move in? This collective “brain drain” has left Mississippi less competitive in the long run.
I personally chose to move back to Mississippi. Many of my friends have at some point chose to come here, to stay here, or to return here. Mississippi is a warm, hospitable place with a unique culture, but if there is not a job here for you, then one is forced to move elsewhere.
We should be radical when it comes to ambitiously crafting an environment that fosters economic growth. Mississippi should be the easiest place in the country to start, maintain, and grow a business.
As the 2020 Census shows, we have little to lose. Now is the time to take courageous efforts to outpace others by making it easier to work, live, and thrive in our wonderful state. Only if we commit ourselves to establishing a foundation ripe for economic growth will the 2030 Census bring brighter news.
Of all the challenges associated with starting a business and launching a bright idea, perhaps there is no greater obstacle than gathering capital. But the power of the internet has revolutionized the way that individuals start and invest in businesses. The new funding methods are vast, with numerous new financial options available.
In the beauty of the free market, start-ups provide a catalyst for innovation, economic growth, and job creation. But with the often-high costs of starting a business, there is little debate that start-ups need capital. No matter how much potential a business idea might have, it must have capital investment to succeed. It would be a vast understatement to say that new businesses need as many options on the table as possible as they work to pursue their goals, and their options can sometimes be quite limited.
However, in the age of the internet and the smartphone, more and more funding options are opening up for start-ups. One innovative way to generate business capital through the internet that has emerged in recent years is an investment model known as “crowdfunding.”
Although crowdfunding has multiple forms, a particularly promising form is known as “equity crowdfunding.” Equity crowdfunding raises capital through a campaign that markets a company's potential and offers prospective investors equity in the company. When someone contributes to the crowdfunding campaign, they receive a percentage of the company's profits.
Since most of the investments are small and spread out across dozens, hundreds, or even thousands of investors, it allows new businesses to market their company's potential to the general public and garner more funding. Usually, online platforms market these campaigns, and many have been highly successful. The campaigns provide a funding mechanism for innovators to focus on developing new innovations that are well-funded and receive feedback from investors as they innovate.
For instance, Oculus, a virtual reality headset start-up, started in 2012 with a crowdfunding campaign goal of $250,000. The campaign ended up raising almost ten times the original goal, reaching $2.4 million. Just two years later, Facebook purchased the company for $2.3 billion.
Another campaign led to the launching of SkyBell, one of the first of the “smart doorbell” developers that raised its first several hundred thousand dollars in funding through crowdfunding. The examples are numerous. In fact, crowdfunding has been estimated to generate more than $17 billion a year, with projections for the amount to grow even higher in the coming years. Who knows when the next billion-dollar company will get its start from crowdfunding?
In a day in which the government heavily regulates so much of the financial sector, policymakers should review the potential reforms that could be made to increase the feasibility of crowdfunding as an innovative business funding model.
Although much headway has been made on the federal level with crowdfunding policy, there is a need to reform many of the outdated and ineffective crowdfunding policies in many states. Such reforms would increase the potential for state-based crowdfunding successes as well. By reforming regulations on crowdfunding, states can increase opportunity and encourage innovation by expanding the funding options available to start-ups and small businesses.
The beauty of the American experiment is the potential for each state to bring new ideas to the table to increase prosperity and expand opportunity. State crowdfunding policy reforms for the 21st century could be a way to do just that.
Matthew Nicaud is the Tech Policy Specialist for the Mississippi Technology Institute, a division of the Mississippi Center for Public Policy.
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/
***FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE***
Contact: Hunter Estes, [email protected]
Governor Tate Reeves has just signed HB1263 which makes it easier for people to move to Mississippi to work. The statute removes a bureaucratic barrier that keeps skilled newcomers from being able to earn a living.
Authored by Representative Becky Currie, this new law allows people who already have a license in another state to more easily get one when they settle in the Magnolia state. We interviewed Rep. Currie about the importance of the legislation here.
The legislation was passed almost unanimously out of both the House and the Senate.
This new law is part of a wider move to make Mississippi more business friendly and open to entrepreneurs.
“We are incredibly thankful to Representative Becky Currie, Senator Angela Hill, Senator Kevin Blackwell, Senator John Polk, Governor Tate Reeves, Speaker Philip Gunn, and Lt. Gov. Delbert Hosemann for their work on this legislation,” noted Douglas Carswell, President & CEO of the Mississippi Center for Public Policy, which has been driving the calls for reform.
“We spend millions of dollars trying to recruit companies to come here, but this law is a simple, effective way to create more jobs right here in Mississippi. For too long, people have been moving out of state to work. This helps reverse that by making it easier for folks to come here and continue the pursuit of the American dream.”
MCPP's Dr. Jameson Taylor noted, “this has been a two-year effort. In 2020, we worked with the Department of Defense to enact the nation’s best law to make it easier for military spouses and dependents to move to Mississippi and start working right away. This year we expanded the law to extend these same benefits to skilled workers moving to Mississippi.”
Data recently released by the Legatum Institute’s Prosperity Index shows that Mississippi is the 41st most costly state in the Union in terms of acquiring an occupational license.
“It is especially important that this law was passed and signed, and that high barriers to work opportunities don’t hold back folks that want to come here to work,” Carswell explained.
Already, Arizona, Montana, Pennsylvania, Missouri, Utah, Iowa and Idaho have passed this reform, which is also being introduced in multiple state legislatures this year.
MCPP President’s Douglas Carswell is available for media interviews. Please email [email protected] for requests.
***ENDS***
Opening the door to new technologies in Mississippi is going to take a new way of thinking about regulation. The old approach of regulating first and asking questions later is not going to work. That is why states, like Utah and Wyoming, are opening the door wide to innovation by applying a regulatory soft-touch to new business ideas, like blockchain.
One idea, passed by the Utah Legislature this year, is the concept of a regulatory sandbox. This idea has gained traction in different forms already in Mississippi. In 2017, a bill to create a regulatory-lite zone, sponsored by Rep. Greg Snowden, passed the House. Subsequently, Speaker Philip Gunn introduced bills aimed at using red-tape reduction as an economic development tool.
This session, Rep. Dan Eubanks has been blazing his own trail. Rep. Eubanks introduced two bills – HB 1454 and HB 1455 – that would create a new program to allow companies to test innovative concepts without being smothered by regulation. Borrowing from Utah, the bills create a regulatory “sandbox,” which would encourage innovators to develop technologies and business concepts.
This vision of a regulatory sandbox champions one of the Mississippi Technology Institute’s key aspirations for innovation. MTI recently had the opportunity to discuss this legislation with Rep. Eubanks. MTI’s Tech Specialist Matthew Nicaud conducted the interview.
Matthew: What is the purpose of the two sandbox bills you introduced?
Rep. Eubanks: The bills create a special program called a “regulatory sandbox”: one creates a general sandbox, the other creates a sandbox just for Farm Tech. The idea of a sandbox allows innovative businesses to be exempt from all non-essential regulations in a specific sector, such as energy or agriculture. What this does is create an environment where innovators can grow their business ideas without being burdened by unnecessary regulations. It also gives regulators a platform to understand innovation and develop appropriately informed regulations. This prevents the regulatory agencies from making vague and arbitrary rules that hinder new ideas. Really, what the sandbox does is encourage dialogue between businesses and regulators so that they can better understand how to work together.
Matthew: Why is innovation an important tool to encourage prosperity in Mississippi?
Rep. Eubanks: Innovation creates a platform for the development of new tools and business models. Mississippians can use these new ideas to generate capital, grow businesses, and provide for their families. The people of our state have the drive and the vision to unleash prosperity. By using the creative avenues that come about from innovation, Mississippi citizens have the potential to further prosper and grow.
Matthew: With technology advancing at such a rapid pace, how would these bills create a friendly environment for technological innovation?
Rep. Eubanks: Ultimately it is people, not the government, who will continue to create the innovations that drive our economy. History has shown us that the free market is the greatest engine for innovation. I believe that the best thing for the government to do is step aside. We should let the innovators put their great ideas out into the market. Innovation moves at a very fast pace, and it doesn’t wait around for regulators. So, Mississippi has a responsibility to create an environment where innovation can be explored without regulations impeding the progress. Creating a “sandbox” environment does just that. It protects innovators from heavy-handed and misinformed regulations. It is an important step in the right direction.
Matthew: Has there been innovative success in other states that implemented regulatory sandboxes?
Rep. Eubanks: The state of Utah has created regulatory sandboxes and has seen much success. The state has seen innovations in multiple industries ranging from insurance to legal service technologies. In addition, other states have created sandboxes for the testing and development of financial technologies. This has not only facilitated greater access to capital, but it also has allowed for the further application of innovative financial technologies such as mobile banking and blockchain. Mississippi has a special opportunity to be a place of innovation for several of its largest industries, such as agriculture and manufacturing. There is so much potential if we can be an early adapter in this area.
Matthew: What can be done to move the sandbox concept forward?
Rep. Eubanks: The creation of a regulatory sandbox program will need to be accomplished through legislation. For a bill to advance through the process, it will need the support of our state leaders. This is a practical way for the legislature to encourage economic development through the power of free-market innovation. The goal to encourage innovation is something I believe we can all agree on. Implementing a regulatory sandbox program is an excellent step toward this goal.
Rep. Dan Eubanks represents DeSoto County, Mississippi (District 25).
***FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE***
House Passes Major Occupational Licensing Reform Bill Championed by MCPP
Contact: Hunter Estes, [email protected]
The Mississippi House has just passed HB1263 which makes it easier for people to move to Mississippi to work. The bill removes a bureaucratic barrier that keeps skilled newcomers from being able to earn a living. HB1263 now moves onto Governor Reeves for consideration.
Authored by Representative Becky Currie, this bill would allow people who already have a license in another state to more easily get one when they settle in the Magnolia state. We interviewed Rep. Currie about the importance of the bill here.
The House voted to pass the bill by a vote of 115-1.
Today’s bill is part of a wider move to make Mississippi more business friendly and open to entrepreneurs.
“We are incredibly thankful to Representative Becky Currie, Senator Angela Hill, Senator Kevin Blackwell, Senator John Polk, Speaker Philip Gunn, and Lt. Gov. Delbert Hosemann for their work on this bill,” noted Douglas Carswell, President & CEO of the Mississippi Center for Public Policy, which has been driving the calls for reform.
“We spend millions of dollars trying to recruit companies to come here, but this bill is a simple, effective way to create more jobs right here in Mississippi. For too long, people have been moving out of state to work. This helps reverse that by making it easier for folks to come here and continue the pursuit of the American dream.”
Data recently released by the Legatum Institute’s Prosperity Index shows that Mississippi is the 41st most costly state in the Union in terms of acquiring an occupational license.
“It is especially important that this bill passed, and that high barriers to work opportunities don’t hold back folks that want to come here to work,” Carswell explained.
Already, Arizona, Montana, Pennsylvania, Missouri, Utah, Iowa and Idaho have passed this reform, which is also being introduced in multiple state legislatures this year.
MCPP President’s Douglas Carswell is available for media interviews. Please email [email protected] for requests.
***ENDS***
***FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE***
Senate Passes HB 1263, Occupational Licensing Reform Bill Championed by MCPP
Contact: Hunter Estes, [email protected]
The Mississippi Senate has just passed HB 1263 which makes it easier for people to move to Mississippi to work. The bill removes a bureaucratic barrier that keeps skilled newcomers from being able to earn a living.
Authored by Representative Becky Currie, this bill would allow people who already have a license in another state to more easily get one when they settle in the Magnolia state.
The Senate passed HB 1263 by a vote of 51-1.
Today’s bill is part of a wider move to make Mississippi more business friendly and open to entrepreneurials.
“We are incredibly thankful to Representative Becky Currie, Senator Angela Hill, Senator Kevin Blackwell, Senator John Polk, and Lt. Governor Delbert Hosemann for their work on this bill,” noted Douglas Carswell, President & CEO of the Mississippi Center for Public Policy, which has been helping to drive the calls for reform.
“We spend millions of dollars trying to recruit companies to come here, but this bill is a simple, effective way to create more jobs right here in Mississippi. For too long, people have been moving out of state to work. This helps reverse that by making it easier for folks to come here and continue the pursuit of the American dream.”
Data recently released by the Legatum Institute’s Prosperity Index shows that Mississippi is the 41st most costly state in the Union in terms of occupational licensing costs.
“It is especially important that this bill passed, and that high barriers to work opportunities don’t hold back folks that want to come here to work,” Carswell explained.
Already, Arizona, Montana, Pennsylvania, Missouri, Utah, Iowa and Idaho have passed this reform, which is also being introduced in multiple state legislatures this year.
MCPP President’s Douglas Carswell is available for media interviews. Please email [email protected] for requests.
***ENDS***
Legislation is moving in the Senate that would make it easier for new Mississippi residents to use their education and experience to contribute to the state economy.
HB 1263, sponsored by Rep. Becky Currie, would recognize the hard work and long hours individuals put in to get an occupational license. The bill passed the House unanimously and was taken up by the Senate committee on Accountability, Efficiency, and Transparency today.
If a new Mississippi resident holds a license from another state, this bill makes it easier for that individual to get the same license here, as long as their credentials and scope of practice is the same. Nine other states have passed similar legislation in a race to make their state more attractive to new residents. The bill is based on a successful reform passed last year that also makes it easier for military spouses and dependents to move to Mississippi and obtain an occupational license.
About HB1263, MCPP President Douglas Carswell stated, “This bill is great news for Mississippi. It will mean more jobs and it will make it easier for businesses to grow.”
“For too long, restrictive laws have denied ordinary Americans the freedom to move to Mississippi and work. New residents have had to get additional education and training, even when they are well qualified elsewhere. This bill reduces obstacles and makes it simpler to come to Mississippi and work.”
“Well done to Rep. Currie for standing up for working people.”
Dr. Jameson Taylor, Senior Vice President for Policy, stated, “This bill is one of the easiest, best things we can do to encourage people to move to Mississippi. If someone has invested thousands of dollars to obtain the education and experience necessary to get an occupational license, we should open the door for them to move to Mississippi and get a Mississippi license. We spend millions of dollars trying to recruit companies to come here. This bill spends nothing. Yet, I believe this reform could create hundreds of jobs here in Mississippi as high-skilled individuals decide Mississippi is the place they want to be.”
Continued Taylor, “When families move to Mississippi, we make it easy for their kids’ K-12 grade-level coursework to transfer over. We make it easy for college coursework to transfer over. Why wouldn’t we do the same thing when it comes to occupational licensing and let people carry over their relevant education and experience to get a Mississippi license?”
The bill now moves on for consideration by the full Senate. It must pass before a deadline of March 10.
Covid hit Mississippi’s economy particularly hard. Tens of thousands of jobs disappeared as unemployment rose to 16 percent. In the second quarter of 2020, a record number of businesses went bust, filing for Chapter 11 protection.
However devastating the pandemic, Covid has not destroyed America’s spirit of enterprise. Data just in from the US Census Bureau shows a remarkable rise in the number of new businesses being set up. And you know what’s most encouraging?
The state with the biggest surge in new business applications nationwide is Mississippi.
In January this year, over 6,000 new businesses were started in this state. That meant a 164 percent surge in new businesses registering compared with January last year.
This entrepreneurial spirit is just one reason why unemployment in our state has fallen dramatically from its peak last year, and is now down below the national average.
This surge in start-ups is great news for the future. Growth does not happen because politicians arrange for big businesses to set up shop in our state via all kinds of inducements. Real growth comes when we create the right conditions that enable small start-ups to expand.
At the Mississippi Center for Public Policy, we are promoting policies that will allow entrepreneurs to flourish. That means taking steps to deregulate our state’s economy.
Too many areas of economic activity in Mississippi require some sort of official’s authorization or permit. There are too many boards and commissions in Jackson able to fix the system to keep out the competition. Far too many jobs require unnecessary certification.
If Mississippi is to grow the way Tennessee or Florida have been growing, we need a red tape reduction plan. That means systematically going through the rule book and throwing out unreasonable regulations that hold entrepreneurs back.
Mississippi needs lower taxes, too. There has been lots of encouraging talk about abolishing personal income tax. I think we need to stop taxing entrepreneurs’ inventories, too.
In order to ensure that Mississippi policy-makers help, rather than hinder, innovation, we have just launched the Mississippi Tech Institute. We aim to remove those regulatory obstacles that risk holding our state back.
When folk think about innovation, they often imagine tech start-ups. Important though these are, here in Mississippi there is enormous potential for innovation in other areas, too, such as agriculture and energy production.
The spirit of enterprise is alive and well in Mississippi. Our task is to get big government out of its way.
It is precisely because Mississippi is a relatively small state that we can be nimble, making the kind of changes we need and serving as an example to the rest of America.