close

The Mississippi Center for Public Policy has appointed Lesley Davis as its Executive Vice President. Davis previously served as the Interim President & CEO, during which time, the organization conducted a global search over multiple months that ultimately led to the selection of Douglas Carswell, Brexit leader and former Member of British Parliament, as the new President & CEO.

To this new position, Davis brings a passion for her fellow Mississippians as well as extensive policy, legal, and development experience. She will play a critical leadership role through strategic planning, policy advancement, and development.

Regarding the appointment, Davis said, “I’ve loved and supported this organization for almost 22 years, and to have this chance now to support her mission from the inside with this incredibly talented team is a dream come true.”

She went on to note that, “[a]s a lifelong Mississippian, who went to public school and college here, met her husband here, and raised three sons here, I love this state and its people deeply. Nothing would bring me greater joy than to be able to help make Mississippi freer and more prosperous.”

MCPP’s new President & CEO, Douglas Carswell, stated, “I am absolutely delighted that Lesley will be staying on as our Executive Vice President.  Her commitment to our organization and to free market ideals is exemplary.  Her energy and enthusiasm are a major asset to our team.” 

Davis has also served MCPP as a board member and policy leader since February 2019. Her deep respect and appreciation for the fundamental freedoms guaranteed in our Constitution have fueled a lifelong interest in law, public policy, and political philosophy. 

She received her BA in political science with a minor in English from Mississippi State University, where she served as Executive Director of the College Republicans, President of the Pre-Law Society, Student Association Attorney General, and Campaign Director for Senator Trent Lott’s senatorial campaign on the MSU campus. She was a starting guard for the MSU Women’s Basketball team and was voted MSU’s Homecoming Queen.  

Davis received her Juris Doctorate from The University of Baltimore, where she was President of the Christian Legal Society and Executive Director of the Republican Law Students. She served as a law clerk to the Honorable Arlin M. Adams, United States Office of Independent Counsel in Washington D.C. (previously U.S. Court of Appeals judge for the Third Circuit) and was later hired as an OIC Prosecuting Attorney. She continued her career as a partner in a well-respected Baltimore law firm, where she focused on toxic tort and medical malpractice defense litigation. 

Since returning home to Mississippi, Lesley has served on the Advisory Committee of the Mississippi Justice Institute, the Executive Committee of Bully Bloc,  the Board of Directors for the Cline Centers, the MSU Alumni Advisory Board, the Board of Directors of the MSU Shackouls Honors College, the Board of Directors of Delta Gamma— Jackson, the Young Life Executive Committee, the Jackson Preparatory Global Leadership Institute Board of Directors (currently the Board Chair), and as a small group leader and large group teacher/speaker in women’s ministry at First Presbyterian Church Jackson, where she is a member. Lesley lives in Flowood with her husband, John, and their three sons: Jack, Charlie, and Will.

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

I’m Matthew Nicaud, the Tech Policy Analyst at MCPP, and your host for the Tech Talks interview series. In our Tech Talks, we engage with tech leaders, policy makers, and entrepreneurs to discuss the tech world in the Magnolia state and promote public thought on key tech issues.

For this edition of Tech Talks, I recently had the privilege to talk with Tim Mask. Tim is an advocate for economic tech development in Mississippi and the CEO of Maris, West, & Baker marketing firm in Jackson, MS. In our conversation, we explore key questions. How can Mississippi grow its tech economy? What are the challenges? Where has the state made headway?

Let’s hear from Tim Mask….

I was born here, and I've made a career here. Socially and economically, I also am the owner of a company. The prosperity of my company depends on the economy of our state doing well and particularly organizations and businesses that are largely either service or knowledge-based type companies. But it's not just for the well-being of my company, it is for the well-being of myself and my family. And then for those people that work for this company, the state needs to do well, the state needs to do well in certain sectors. And that's really where my passion in this lies.

I'm a strong advocate of free markets. I have seen where public-private partnerships can and do work particularly in being able to provide  some aid to entrepreneurial endeavors. And that's probably even more important in a state like ours, where we have less available investment in venture capital than a lot of other places. This goes into part of the reason that some of our entrepreneurs ended up leaving for other places that have more ready access to venture capital. So the idea is that in some instances, the government is able to “prime the pump," and then the private sector uses that to take it from there.

I'm not for zero government participation in the start-up culture and economic development. But I also think that the private sector can, in most cases, do things better and more efficiently than the public sector can.

I think we lose a lot of potential when we're losing talent, particularly the kind of talent that we've traditionally been losing. There's also the component of talent attraction. You can argue the numbers from different aspects, but I've always said that you can't argue against the fact that talent attraction policies play a huge role in this.

I think Mississippi generally has a good business operating environment. And I think most of the research and the studies show that. So, it’s not that we don’t have a good business operating environment. We look at Silicon Valley, Austin, or the Research Triangle in North Carolina, and what these tech hubs have in common is a really strong research university component. With this is an almost ferocious tech transfer effort. This means getting that theoretical technology and development that goes through the research university system, into a practical form and out into the private sector.

We have some good research universities in Mississippi. In the past, they tended to work more in silos outside of the economic development community. This is changing pretty rapidly, but it hasn’t been that great from a tech transfer standpoint. But I think we are now seeing the research universities cooperating more amongst themselves. And you're seeing that economic development community at the state level work closer with those research universities. So these efforts are not disjointed anymore. I think that is a very encouraging development that we are recently seeing in the state.

I would say the biggest issue is access to venture capital. It is mostly a venture capital issue. I'm generalizing here, but there are “five guys” that everybody goes to in Mississippi when they want an angel investment or when they’re seeking some start-up money. There are five guys. They're all guys, and they're getting increasingly older. These guys can only fund so many ventures, and this lack of available funding makes it difficult for start-ups to get off the ground. There is also the lack of a strong unifying network of Mississippi incubators and accelerators, which is a contributing barrier for entrepreneurs.

I think the flag was an issue, and I think we did what we needed do there. I think it was overdue, and I think it was necessary. I think that removed one of the biggest barriers, maybe the biggest one.

I don't want to say that some of the other policies aren't ever looked at by the tech community, but I also don't want to say that these policies make a meaningful difference. I think some companies may look at these conservative social policies, particularly certain industries such as the entertainment industry. Some of these things are issues for some industries but are not an issue for others. But generally speaking, I don't think that these things are a real barrier for venture capital coming into the state. And we're not necessarily trying to attract entrepreneurs to the state. I don't know if that makes a lot of sense. We're trying to retain entrepreneurs in the state. I think that is where our focus should be.

When you want more of something, incentivize it, when you want less of something, tax it. So, it's all well and good to attract a paper mill. There is a model for doing that, and it may or may not work out, depending on the deal. But when you talk about incentivizing people, you are incentivizing the skills that those people bring to the table versus just incentivizing the industry. It is a whole lot cheaper to incentivize a person than it is to incentivize industry, such as a plant.

Also, you've probably got good jobs at that plant, but a plant that employed 3,000 people 25 years ago now probably employs 300 and may soon employ 30 because of automation. That's been going on for half a century.

Additionally, most jobs at that plant are going to top out at a certain pay rate. That puts a ceiling on us. But I think it's an artificial ceiling. It doesn't have to be there. When you talk about people-incentivized economic development, you are talking about investing in individuals instead of industries. It is a lot cheaper to invest in individuals than it is to invest in whole industries. This leads to less overall investment in the incentives -which is good for the taxpayer. You are talking about not putting a ceiling on the earning potential of individuals who are staying in the state or who you are attracting to the state. This investment in a knowledge-based economy, is a formula to raise the state's per capita income, which should be the goal of every economic development program. Bringing industry to the state is not the goal.  Bringing in talent to the state is not the goal. These things are just means to the end. The goal is to raise the per capita income of the citizens of the state.

As a state with only about 3 million people, it’s not going to take much to start moving the needle of higher per capita income. Especially when we talk about underserved communities, it's not going to take that much to get this ball rolling. And then when it does, you have a snowball effect, because you are bringing in business here. You are retaining the type of individuals and entrepreneurs here that then spin off other ventures, other products, and other companies. So when you get that cycle going, it is the same model that has seen so much success in places like Silicon Valley.

I'd say making sure that our entire economic development ecosystem has a unified game plan. For the most part, we should be moving in the same direction, from the very top down to the local level through Chambers of Commerce. That doesn't mean all areas of the state are going to be trying to do the same exact things, but its a cluster approach that strategically moves us all to a targeted goal. That's what we're starting to see now. So it's extremely encouraging.

Here at the Mississippi Center for Public Policy, we believe that with its hard-working people, cutting-edge research centers, and low cost of living, Mississippi is a state with immense potential to make a substantial national impact on the rapidly emerging tech economy.

Considering the potential for technological expansion in our state, we are pleased to launch the Tech Talks interview series. In our Tech Talks, we will have engaging discussions with individuals from across the state who are making an impact on the advancement of technological prosperity in Mississippi through their initiative and innovation. We will hear their insights, stories, and expertise on a variety of important issues for tech innovation in Mississippi, ranging from regulatory reform to advancements in tech-driven solutions. We look forward to seeing the Tech Talks series as a place to showcase the past successes and future objectives that are driving the tech conversation in our state.

The series will be led by Matthew Nicaud, Mississippi Center for Public Policy’s new Tech Policy Analyst. His work will focus on engaging with tech policy from a free market-oriented perspective and working with policy and community leaders to advance public discussion on these issues.

Using these opportunities to interact with some of the best and brightest in our state, MCPP looks forward to further exploring the tech landscape and starting the conversation on tech policy issues. With the understanding that economic liberty leads to economic prosperity, we are excited to hear from pioneering tech leaders, policy makers, and entrepreneurs on how Mississippi can encourage tech advancements and reach new heights.

We invite you to join us as we showcase the Mississippi leaders that are making a difference in tech and promoting prosperity in our state!

Visit the Tech Talks homepage at:

Tech Talks Series

“At 22, I became the head biomedical engineer at Merit Health in Natchez. A year later, I started freelancing, with the approval of my hospital administrator. 

“My business, Southeastern Biomedical, provides clinical engineering services for medical facilities in Mississippi and Louisiana, focusing on rural areas. The engineering program at Mississippi State taught me an important lesson to remember when starting a business: don’t start with just an idea – first, find a problem, and then, provide a solution. 

“When I moved to Natchez, I soon learned the surrounding rural areas did not have options for biomedical engineering services. I started Southeastern Biomedical because I want these rural clinics to be able to “shop around” for their clinical engineering needs -- not be locked into having to rely only on large corporations. 

“Rural towns need medical clinics for their communities. Southeastern Biomedical provides support services to help sustain these clinics. We are nimbler and less expensive. Often, we can diagnose and fix problems that corporate staff cannot.

“I want to see Mississippi grow and prosper. Small businesses create jobs. I see a bright future – not only for engineers in Mississippi, but for female engineers in particular. Biomedical engineering will play a significant role in Mississippi's and the Southeast's expanding contribution to biomedical technology and innovation. Amazing advancements in medicine and care will occur over the next decade. 

“I am excited to be part of it!”

Julianna Wallace
Southeastern Biomedical
Natchez, Mississippi

The education setting for many children in Mississippi shifted this year. Perhaps the numbers weren’t as dramatic as mid-summer polling indicated, but the number of homeschoolers has increased by 35 percent over the previous year. 

According to unofficial data collected by the Mississippi Department of Education, 25,376 students are homeschooling this year. These numbers aren’t final and may increase. Families are required to submit a certificate of enrollment form for each child who is homeschooled by September 15. Generally, families don’t submit forms for kindergarteners because compulsory education in Mississippi begins at 6. 

For the previous school year, there were 18,904 homeschoolers. Homeschooling now makes up about 5 percent of total student enrollment. 

The relative ease of homeschooling has helped many families who had never considered homeschooling get started. For a state that has generally shown little interest in education freedom, the freedom to homeschool is broadly supported and protected by law. The one thing a parent must do is file an annual certificate of enrollment with your local school district’s school attendance officer. All you need on the form is your child’s name, address, phone number, and a simple description of the program such as, “age appropriate curriculum.”  

When you do that, your child and you are now exempt from the state’s punitive compulsory education laws. There are no requirements on curriculum or testing or who can teach. Parents, instead, have the freedom to choose the educational system, style, and setting that works best for them and their children. 

The Department of Education “recommends” parents review state curriculum guidelines and maintain a portfolio of their child’s work, thought that is not required. As opposed to following a government curriculum that tells your child what he or she must learn at what age, homeschooling allows you to let your child learn at their own pace. 

That means a child who is excelling can move forward at a quicker pace, cover additional topics, or take in material at a deeper level. If a child is struggling, you can slow down, switch your teaching style, or bring in new materials. If your child has a unique interest, the world is literally at their fingertips with scores of free, online training materials. Yes, YouTube is filled with funny cat videos. But it also provides a library of instruction on virtually any topic you can think of.      

Thanks to today’s technology, a quick Google search can help you get more comfortable with homeschooling. There is an abundance of homeschool Facebook groups with veterans who are willing to share their ideas on getting started, curriculum, extracurricular activities, maintaining your sanity, and much more. Connection to these groups is also a venue to plan an endless variety of outings and field trips. It won’t take long to realize your child will receive as much “socialization” as you would like.  

There are also options such as co-ops, where families gather together and share teaching responsibilities among parents. Similarly, we have seen the emergence of microschools this year in which a small group of parents pool their resources together to hire a teacher. 

While homeschooling experienced it's biggest one-year jump ever, the number of students attending government schools fell from just under 466,000 last year to 442,000, a drop of over 5 percent. This is the eighth straight year that enrollment has decreased since a peak of almost 493,000 for the 2012-2013 school year. 

Mississippi voters overwhelmingly approved a medical marijuana ballot initiative on Tuesday while rejecting the more restrictive measure from the legislature. Mississippi will soon become the 35th state with a medical marijuana program. 

With over 60 percent of the vote in Wednesday morning, 74 percent of voters chose Initiative 65, the citizen-sponsored ballot initiative. This was the second part of a two-step process because of the legislative alternative. In the first question, 68 percent said “for either.” If a majority had said “against both,” the initiative would have died regardless of the second question. 

As written in the initiative, the Mississippi Department of Health will be responsible for developing regulations for the program by July 1, 2021. Medical marijuana patient cards will need to be issued by August 15, 2021.

Here is how the process will work.

Step 1

A person must have a debilitating medical condition. The term “debilitating medical condition” is defined in the proposal as one of 22 named diseases, plus there is a special allowance for a physician to certify medical marijuana for a similar diagnosis.

Some of those conditions include:

Step 2

A person with a debilitating medical condition is examined in-person and in Mississippi by a physician. The term “physician” is defined in the proposal as a Mississippi-licensed M.D. or D.O. 

If the physician concludes that a person suffers from a debilitating medical condition and that the use of medical marijuana may mitigate the symptoms or effects of the condition, the physician may certify the person to use medical marijuana by issuing a form as prescribed by the Mississippi Board of Health. 

The issuance of this form is defined in the proposal as a “physician certification” and is valid for 12 months, unless the physician specifies a shorter period of time.

Step 3

A person with a debilitating medical condition who has been issued a physician certification becomes a qualified patient under the proposal.

Step 4

A qualified patient then presents the physician certification to the Mississippi Department of Health and is issued a medical marijuana identification card. 

The ID card allows the patient to obtain medical marijuana from a licensed and regulated treatment center and protects the patient from civil and/or criminal sanctions in the event the patient is confronted by law enforcement officers. 

“Shopping” among multiple treatment centers is prevented through the use of a real-time database and online access system maintained by the Mississippi Department of Health.

Medical Marijuana Treatment Centers will be registered with, licensed, and regulated by the Mississippi Department of Health. Each medical marijuana business will have to apply to and be approved by MDH. But there will not be a limit on the number of businesses, allowing for a free market based on demand. 

Users would not be able to smoke medical marijuana in a public place and home grow would be prohibited, though it is legal is some other states.

We know the world changes around us on a regular basis. We can order anything we want on our phone and have it delivered to our front door. Well, except for alcohol. We can use that same phone to catch a ride, rather than having to rely on a government monopoly for service.    

These are just a couple of the more obvious and more recent changes. But it is up to us to adapt and keep up, and for most of human history we’ve done a pretty good job at that.

So, what has been holding us back? Usually the government, and our permission-based society. This became all the more relevant and all the more noticeable at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic. 

Think back to two pressing needs at the time: face masks and hand sanitizer. Empty shelves dotted grocery store aisles. Obviously demand increased, but the private sector can adapt. What was the hold up? Government, specifically the Food and Drug Administration. 

Distilleries wanted to produce hand sanitizer, something that makes a lot of sense, but they faced a maze of local and federal regulations before they could begin. And if you want to make a face mask, you must first go through the FDA’s approval process, which can take months. In both cases, the regulations were eased, and manufacturers were allowed to ratchet up production.  

But should these and many of our regulations exist in the first place? Yes, we need safety, but we can’t be so inflexible that government red tape blocks production on a needed item during a pandemic. That’s obvious, but there are plenty of other areas where government does not allow us to adapt and does not allow entrepreneurs to put their skills to use. 

That is why we need to shift from a permission-based society to a default of permissionless innovation. And it is something we can do in Mississippi, a state that has long trailed the rest of the country when it comes to economic growth. Because too often, government creates the framework, a few enter that field, and then “capture” regulators to make it more difficult for new entrants or technology.

The sharing economy is a great example of this. For decades, government approved taxicabs had a monopoly on the service they provided. They encouraged regulations and worked with local governments to create them. Then ridesharing companies were launched and all of a sudden, they had competition. And the outdated model couldn’t compete with prices, availability, and overall service. Naturally, they went back to government to restrict Uber and Lyft. And local governments like Oxford were happy to comply. 

After all, these new people didn’t come to us for permission. 

So how can we change that and why is this necessary?

COVID-19 impacted more than our ability to purchase face masks or hand sanitizer. Our education systems, restaurants, retail, airlines, and hospitals have all undergone changes to their business model because of the pandemic. We as a state should be encouraging their innovation, rather than placing roadblocks.  

An industry neutral regulatory sandbox offers an opportunity for these businesses to navigate around, and temporarily suspend, problematic rules and regulations, allowing businesses to adapt and compete, based on their own ability and market response rather than their ability to win favor from politicians.

And we need to do this before everyone else.

During an election season, you are bound to hear politicians make a lot of promises. One of the most common – largely because it polls very well – is free, or at least cheaper, health insurance. Regardless of the costs and practicality of such claims, there are reforms that would accomplish what we all want: lower costs and greater access. 

Mississippi is one of 35 states that prohibit entry or expansion of healthcare facilities in the state without permission from the government and your competition through what is known as Certificate of Need laws. Meaning, you can’t just open a new business, or expand your current operation; you need the government’s blessing. 

Mississippi requires CONs within five broad categories: hospital beds, beds outside hospitals, equipment, facilities, and services. Mississippi has 80 CON requirements, 41 of which apply to facilities and buildings. And applications range from $500 to $25,000, to start or grow a business. 

If this happened in any other area of our economy, you would say that is ridiculous. And you’d be right. 

CONs are a product of the 1970s. At the time, the federal government began requiring states to adopt CONs in exchange for federal funds. Some things never change. But the federal government soon learned they didn’t work, and it backtracked, repealing the federal mandate. Thirty-five years later, though, most states are still addicted to this failed government planning. 

Which is unfortunate because we have plenty of research showing CONs don’t do what was initially sold. In fact, they actually hurt healthcare outcomes. Let’s look at three claims according to a gathering of research from the Mercatus Center at George Mason University:

That is part of the reason we have seen bipartisan opposition from both Republican and Democratic administrations. 

In 2004, under President George W. Bush, the Federal Trade Commission and Department of Justice, issued a report saying, “States with Certificate of Need programs should reconsider whether these programs best serve their citizens’ health care needs. The [agencies] believe that, on balance, CON programs are not successful in containing health care costs, and that they pose serious anticompetitive risks that usually outweigh their purported economic benefits. Market incumbents can too easily use CON procedures to forestall competitors from entering an incumbent’s market.”

In 2016, under President Barack Obama, the same two agencies issued a joint opinion, saying, “After considerable experience, it is now apparent that CON laws can prevent the efficient functioning of health care markets in several ways that may undermine those goals.”

Only two states have repealed their CON laws in the past two decades. The proponents of such laws are loud and powerful and are clearly able to garner support from both Republicans and Democrats at the state level. 

Then the coronavirus pandemic hit.

Think back to March, and even today in Mississippi. We are worried about hospital beds. We have a new executive order from Gov. Tate Reeves holding hospital bed space. The first reaction from numerous states was to temporarily suspend all or at least parts of CON laws because of the demand caused by COVID-19. This happened in 24 states, but not Mississippi. 

So during a health pandemic, what did most states do? Repealed CON laws. Which leads to the next question: why do we have CON laws to begin with? If these regulations, which are promoted as being necessary for our “health and safety,” are not good or helpful during a real emergency, we should agree they are not beneficial for us at any time. 

By repealing CON laws, we will help improve healthcare access and help ensure we are ready for the next pandemic. It’s the right policy. It just isn’t as sexy as Medicare for All. 

This column appeared in the Yazoo Herald on October 23, 2020.

Mississippi has more than 118,000 regulations on the books that impact virtually every area of our life. The issue isn’t just that we have more regulations per capita than any other state in the South. It is that they aren’t reviewed to ensure they are cost effective and not counterproductive. 

Last year, legislation was introduced and cleared the House that would have created a pilot program to reduce regulations. Under the proposal, four agencies would have had to review their regulations and reduce those regs 10 percent a year for three years. In three years, they would have been down 30 percent. This would then provide a starting point for future regulatory reductions among other agencies. 

But the legislation didn’t make it through the Senate. And then COVID-19 hit. 

Pandemic necessitates to regulatory reduction

As the coronavirus began to spread, two of the immediate healthcare concerns revolved around limited access to medical professionals and a fear of being in the same facility of someone who has the virus. After all, we’re supposed to be social distancing. Thankfully, telemedicine is available to provide you healthcare access in your living room. 

To expand access, we began to see states waive the requirement that you can only use an in-state physician in March. Mississippi did that. And then just as quickly walked back that change to only allow this if you have a prior patient-physician relationship, greatly limiting your options as a consumer. Mississippians should be able to access the doctor or nurse practitioner of their choosing, regardless of the state they are licensed and whether or not you have had a previous face-to-face visit.

The same story holds in education. As every school in the state was shut down, an order from Gov. Tate Reeves called for all school districts to adopt distance learning for their students. Six months later this is still a challenge partly because of the rural nature of the state but also because we never had an interest in virtual learning. 

Mississippi has a virtual public school, but it’s simply a couple courses a student can take, not a full distance learning program. Every student in the state should have the ability to choose from a plethora of digital options to serve their needs. We are told how hard it is to bring teachers for specific subjects to the most rural or impoverished regions of the state. This could fill that void.

Moreover, virtual charter schools are prohibited in Mississippi’s limited charter law. Some states even have a hybrid mix of homeschool/ charter school facilities where students attend a couple days per week while still doing most of their education at home. Families are able to decide if and what is the best option for their children. Some do a 100 percent virtual program. But not here.  

Not only does the data show us that regulations hurt economic growth, but they limited healthcare and education access – two very crucial aspects in the lives of most people – during an international pandemic.

That should tell us something.  

Potential next steps?

At the federal level, legislation has been introduced to create a commission that would be tasked with reviewing, and potentially modifying and eliminating regulations. This would serve in many ways like the BRAC commission that was formed at the end of the Cold War to close unneeded military bases. In these instances, politicians are replaced with impartial judges who have a specific mission likely to not be impacted by special interests or electoral concerns. 

Mississippi could do something similar. After all, there is general agreement that rules and regulations need to be changed or deleted. The problem is just doing it. Because with every rule is a special interest group or government bureaucracy that likes it.

Mississippi could also move to true sunset provisions on regulations. That is what exists in Idaho and helped the state become the least regulated state in the nation. In 2019, the Idaho legislature essentially repealed their entire state code book when the legislature adjourned without renewing the regulations, something they are required to do each session because the state has an automatic sunset provision. The governor was then tasked with deciding which regulation the state actually needs. With this, the burden on regulations now switches from the governor or legislature needing to justify why a regulation should to be removed to justifying why we need to keep a regulation. 

We know regulatory reform is needed. And there are plenty of paths the legislature can follow. It’s just a matter of doing it. 

magnifiercross linkedin facebook pinterest youtube rss twitter instagram facebook-blank rss-blank linkedin-blank pinterest youtube twitter instagram