Following a recommendation from the Department of Health, the Gulf Coast cities of Biloxi, Gulfport, Ocean Springs, and D'Iberville all moved to close bars and restaurants Friday.
Under a new recommendation from the department, restaurants should close dining facilities and move to take out and delivery only in an effort to ease the spread of coronavirus. Last night, the cities of Biloxi, Gulfport, Ocean Springs, and D'Iberville joined Jackson, Tupelo, Oxford, and Moss Point in making such a move.
Even without an official statewide ban, most restaurants had already made this move. Thanks to the innovation of food delivery apps, the ability to get food without having to leave your house is a reality. Many of the apps have responded to the crisis by waiving delivery fees. And as the demand has increased, so has the opportunity for gig work delivering food.
The department is also recommending gatherings should be 10 people or less, which is in line with the CDC guidance. Residents are advised not to attend weddings, funerals, or church services, for example. Many churches have moved to live-streaming services, if they had not already done so.
Three states – California, New York, and Illinois – have moved forward with “shelter in place” orders that require all residents to stay home, except for essential workers who must go to work and those purchasing essential supplies, such as groceries.
As of Friday, Mississippi had 80 positive cases of COVID-19 and one death.
The Mississippi Department of Health is now recommending that all restaurants and bars close their dining facilities in an effort to combat the spread of the coronavirus.
Currently, four cities in Mississippi – Jackson, Oxford, Tupelo, and Moss Point – have enacted ordinances or orders requiring restaurants to close and move to take out or delivery orders only. But the nationwide movement is toward closing restaurants, or any facility where large groups gather.
Even without an official statewide ban, most restaurants had already made this move. Thanks to the innovation of food delivery apps, the ability to get food without having to leave your house is a reality. Many of the apps have responded to the crisis by waiving delivery fees. And as the demand has increased, so has the opportunity for gig work delivering food.
The department is also recommending gatherings should be 10 people or less, which is in line with the CDC guidance. Residents are advised not to attend weddings, funerals, or church services, for example. Many churches have moved to live-streaming services, if they had not already done so.
Three states – California, New York, and Illinois – have moved forward with “shelter in place” orders that require all residents to stay home, except for essential workers who must go to work and those purchasing essential supplies, such as groceries.
As of Friday, Mississippi had 80 positive cases of COVID-19 and one death.
The Department of Revenue has updated multiple regulations to make it easier for consumers to purchase alcohol as residents deal with the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, and the related self-quarantine.
Earlier in the week, DOR began allowing liquor stores to take orders online or over the phone, while providing curbside delivery rather than having to enter the retail establishment. This was previously illegal.
Now, as many restaurants are shutting down dining halls either voluntarily or via local ordinance or order, DOR will allow customers to purchase a sealed bottle of wine with their to-go order. To-go sales of mixed drinks remain prohibited. As does the delivery of alcoholic beverages.
Many states have begun to ease off similar alcohol prohibitions, but some have moved further. In Texas, an order from Gov. Greg Abbot allows restaurants to deliver alcoholic beverages with your meal delivery.
For years, supporters have pushed for direct shipment of wine to their house. The proposal was loudly defeated in the Senate last week, killing its chances for another year.
Senate Bill 2534, authored by Sen. Walter Michel (R-Ridgeland) and carried by Sen. Josh Harkins (R-Flowood) on the floor, would have made Mississippi the 44th state in the country to allow consumers to purchase wine and have it shipped directly to their house. Currently in Mississippi, a control state, you are limited to what the state has in stock, limiting your freedom to choose the wine you prefer. If ABC doesn’t have it available, you don’t have the option.
On deadline day, the bill came to the floor and was defeated 32-13. Thirteen Republicans voted for the bill, and two others that would have supported the bill paired their votes with opponents. Every other Republican voted no, as did the entire Democratic caucus.
This is the latest defeat this session, though we don’t usually see floor votes showcasing the opposition from legislators. Earlier this session, bills to allow wine in grocery stores died in committee without a vote considered in either chamber.
House Bill 981, sponsored by Rep. Brent Powell (R-Flowood), and Senate Bill 2531, sponsored by Michel, would have allowed wine to be sold in grocery stores, while providing up to six permits. You are currently limited to one permit. Wine sales in grocery stores are legal in 39 states, including Alabama, Louisiana, and Tennessee. But it will remain illegal in Mississippi, at least in 2020.
Some new establishments, including Costco in Ridgeland, Whole Foods in Jackson, and Sam’s Club in Madison, have separate establishments that sell alcohol – essentially their own liquor store attached to their main store, but not a place you can access without leaving the main grocery store. Most grocery stores can’t or won’t take on what is an unnecessary burden.
The opposition to alcohol freedom is very loud, and obviously influential with legislators.
And they don’t even hide what they are trying to do. It is liquor stores who don’t want competition, and everyone in Jackson knows that. But it shouldn’t be the job of the legislature to pick winners and losers. Coupled with the Department of Revenue who says we can’t handle the capacity of the wine needed to stock Kroger and Walmart (maybe we should remove the state from the alcohol distribution business), you have a pretty dangerous one-two punch that has outgunned citizens who overwhelmingly favor these ideas.
It is abundantly clear that most Mississippians who don’t have a vested interest in the status quo want change. They are tired of having the government make life decisions for them and would prefer that they have the ability to decide if, when, and where they purchase wine, and how it is delivered.
But for now, Mississippi will have these small regulatory changes. For at least a couple months.
In this episode of Unlicensed, Brett and Hunter talk about what the coronavirus has meant for Mississippi and the country, how technology has benefited us all, and what states are doing to lift licenses and regulations that make it harder to access healthcare.
Occupational licensing laws have long stood as a barrier to entry for many, while limiting consumer choices for all. As the COVID-19 virus spreads, both the federal government and various states have moved to ease overburdensome regulations.
The Mississippi Board of Medical Licensure lifted telemedicine regulations that previously prevented out-of-state physicians and nurse practioners from utilizing telemedicine in Mississippi without securing a license to practice medicine in the state. Our emergency orders also allow out-of-state nurses to work in Mississippi.
A similar story is being told nationwide.
In Massachusetts, an order was issued to grant temporary licenses, within one day, to nurses holding out-of-state licenses who wish to come to Massachusetts to staff healthcare facilities. North Carolina, South Carolina, Texas, and Maryland followed, allowing out-of-state doctors and nurses to receive temporary licenses.
One state that won’t be issuing such an order is Arizona. Last year, they became the first state to grant universal recognition to out-of-state license holders in all licensed professions and occupations. Including doctors and nurses. Pennsylvania and Montana enacted similar reforms.
Bills were introduced in the state legislature this year to do the same thing. If you received a license in another state, you could work in Mississippi without jumping through red tape. That was the thought at least. The universal bills died without consideration earlier in the session, but a bill specifically for military families passed the House and Senate.
Today, about 19 percent of Mississippians are in an occupation that requires a license. And this is particularly troubling in low and middle-income occupations. Mississippi currently licenses 66 of 102 lower-income occupations, as identified by Institute for Justice.
On average, licensing for low and middle-income occupations in Mississippi requires an individual to complete 160 days of training, to pass two exams, and to pay $330 in fees. Those numbers will vary depending on the industry. For example, a shampooer must receive 1,500 clock hours of education. A fire alarm installer must pay over $1,000 in fees.
The net result is a decrease in the number of people who can work. A study from the National Bureau of Economic Research found that occupational licensing reduces labor supply by 17 to 27 percent.
In Mississippi, the Institute for Justice estimates that licensing has cost the state 13,000 jobs. That represents two Nissan plants that could be created by reducing our licensing burden, and it wouldn’t require a dime in taxpayer incentives.
We are making it easier for doctors and, at least in other states, nurses, to practice because it is a good thing for all. We should take that mindset and expand to all occupations that the state currently licenses. Because when we emerge from the current crisis, our economy, and the jobs many of us occupy, will probably look different than they did prior to the virus.
Now would be a good time to take a deep dive into those various licenses we require in Mississippi and determine if there are voluntary or non-regulatory options that would accomplish the same goals, while opening the doors to those who want to work.
Pre-Coronavirus spread, Mississippi's unemployment was among the highest in the country and our labor participation rate was among the lowest. We should be making it easier to work.
The Department of Revenue is allowing customers to submit liquor store orders online or over the phone, and pickup the order via curbside delivery.
This is the latest regulatory change in the state since Gov. Tate Reeves issued a state of emergency declaration last week. On Sunday, the Board of Medical Licensure lifted multiple telemedicine regulations, including a change to allow out-of-state physicians to treat patients in Mississippi.
The amendment "will allow customers to submit orders and pay liquor retailers by telephone or internet, and allow liquor retailers to provide on-premises curbside delivery," according to the order. The temporary rule will remain in effect for 120 days.
Previously, customers were not allowed to place orders or pick up their purchase outside of the liquor establishment.
Alabama has also adopted a similar policy change in light of the COVID-19 pandemic.
For years, supporters have pushed for direct shipment of wine to their house. The proposal was loudly defeated in the Senate Thursday night, killing its chances for another year.
Senate Bill 2534, authored by Sen. Walter Michel (R-Ridgeland) and carried by Sen. Josh Harkins (R-Flowood) on the floor, would have made Mississippi the 44th state in the country to allow consumers to purchase wine and have it shipped directly to their house. Currently in Mississippi, a control state, you are limited to what the state has in stock, limiting your freedom to choose the wine you prefer. If ABC doesn’t have it available, you don’t have the option.
On deadline day, the bill came to the floor and was defeated 32-13. Thirteen Republicans voted for the bill, and two others that would have supported the bill paired their votes with opponents. Every other Republican voted no, as did the entire Democratic caucus.
This is the latest defeat this session, though we don’t usually see floor votes showcasing the opposition from legislators. Earlier this session, bills to allow wine in grocery stores died in committee without a vote considered in either chamber.
House Bill 981, sponsored by Rep. Brent Powell (R-Flowood), and Senate Bill 2531, sponsored by Michel, would have allowed wine to be sold in grocery stores, while providing up to six permits. You are currently limited to one permit. Wine sales in grocery stores are legal in 39 states, including Alabama, Louisiana, and Tennessee. But it will remain illegal in Mississippi, at least in 2020.
Some new establishments, including Costco in Ridgeland, Whole Foods in Jackson, and Sam’s Club in Madison, have separate establishments that sell alcohol – essentially their own liquor store attached to their main store, but not a place you can access without leaving the main grocery store. Most grocery stores can’t or won’t take on what is an unnecessary burden.
The opposition to alcohol freedom is very loud, and obviously influential with legislators.
And they don’t even hide what they are trying to do. It is liquor stores who don’t want competition, and everyone in Jackson knows that. But it shouldn’t be the job of the legislature to pick winners and losers. Coupled with the Department of Revenue who says we can’t handle the capacity of the wine needed to stock Kroger and Walmart (maybe we should remove the state from the alcohol distribution business), you have a pretty dangerous one-two punch that has outgunned citizens who overwhelmingly favor these ideas.
It is abundantly clear that most Mississippians who don’t have a vested interest in the status quo want change. They are tired of having the government make life decisions for them and would prefer that they have the ability to decide if, when, and where they purchase wine, and how it is delivered.
But for now, Mississippi will have a small regulatory change. For at least a couple months.
Over the last few days, many of us have been forced to embrace alternative work and life patterns from those we previously occupied as the COVID-19 virus pandemic spreads. Some of these strategies have been a bit alien to some, including remote work and the need for food delivery amidst self-isolation. Yet, in truth, we have been empowered to embrace innovation in this period.
The modern digital economy has given us the ability to craft unique approaches to work and consumption that never would have been possible just a few years ago, and it should not have taken a pandemic to embrace policies that encourage this new age sharing economy.
For too long, states have tried to regulate remote and freelance work. They’ve discouraged digital and part-time work by forcing companies to treat them as full-time employees. In an age when more and more people are combining a variety of work opportunities for a full profession, we shouldn’t discourage innovators from creating these opportunities. This includes those seeking to drive for Uber or do graphic design work through Fiverr among countless other jobs.
The state of Mississippi discourages cottage food operation by placing caps and a variety of limits on how these businesses can operate. These policies are often aimed at protecting already established operators from competition. Yet, the person who loses in all of this is the young mother trying to make a bit of extra cash by selling cookies or sweets, as well as the consumer who would choose to buy her product.
In an age when digital conversation has become all the more important, it’s astounding that that the entrepreneur is not legally allowed to go on Facebook or Instagram to share or promote her business.
Many of these types of regulations are revealed to be little more than hollow shells of protectionism. They are policies that carry little good, while discouraging certain businesses from even attempting to operate. Amidst the current crisis, states around the country are removing some of these barriers such as those pertaining to certificates of need, which limit what healthcare providers can open hospitals or care centers, telemedicine rules, which limit the ability for doctors to talk with their patients via online video access, and arbitrary delivery policies, that limit what truckers can haul in order to prop up certain distributors.
In the midst of this crisis, every time a politician comes out and announces that we are suspending such a rule, it is worth asking if we truly needed it in the first place.
Why were we limiting healthcare operators that could have brought more facilities to rural communities? Why were we limiting doctors’ ability to connect with their patients through the internet, especially when this could have mitigated potential hospital exposure to viruses and bacteria amongst the most vulnerable? Why did we stop truckers from hauling food and alcohol in the same truck, when this could have streamlined critical deliveries, especially when communities are in need of resources?
I can’t help but wonder if the legislature feels slightly ridiculous for shutting down these changes previously along with many others. This year, along with legislation that would have allowed for certificate of need changes, the Mississippi Senate killed the direct shipment of wine to households. When so many stores are forced to close, and many of us are quarantined in our homes, this policy seems all the worse.
Over the past few days, I’ve gotten countless emails from DoorDash, PostMates, GrubHub and other food delivery services advertising their businesses. These groups and others have long been discouraged from operating by limiting what they are allowed to deliver and favoring existing businesses, such as taxi companies over Uber, or restaurants over food trucks. During the current virus outbreak, many of these same companies are removing delivery fees in order to make it easier for people to get vital supplies. Other existing companies, restaurants, and grocery stores are turning to delivery and curbside pickup in order to stay open and continue operating.
Yet, while a virus highlights the importance of resource access for the many who are forced to currently stay home, what about those who, due to ailment or ability, were already so often forced to stay home? Over-regulating food, healthcare, and resource access seems terrible during a time of crisis, but it has been hurting people long before the coronavirus.
I am thankful that many of our societal leaders, recognizing the need to create alternative opportunities for work and consumption, have been willing to set aside their entrenched opposition to innovation and remove some of these burdensome rules and regulations.
And, I only hope that moving forward we can take an equally open mindset to new opportunities beyond this crisis, after all, many of these rules have hurt us for too long. I just wish it hadn’t taken a pandemic to realize that.
While we don’t have official numbers, estimates say some 15,00-20,000 Mississippi children are homeschooled during normal times. Currently, every child in the state is learning at home as the state deals with the COVID-19 pandemic.
Without a clear timetable to return to school, we have seen a push toward distance – or online – learning for all Mississippians. Yesterday, Gov. Tate Reeves issued two new executive orders, including one to implement distance learning.
“During the remainder of the school year districts immediately begin working with the Mississippi Department of Education to develop and implement distance learning or other instructional means to achieve completion of essential grade-level instruction for the 2019-2020 school year,” the order reads.
As the education future continues to develop, we will continue to see a demand for online learning, and not just for this spring. With online learning options, students literally have the world at their fingertips. Whether it’s a unique subject with hard-to-find instructors, a class they need more help with, or one that they are wishing to dive deeper into, the ability to use technology to transform education is very real. And it’s already happening. Whether you are in need of a short-term fix or long-term planning, there are dozens of free online resources, many that schools already use within the traditional brick-and-mortar realm.
While it is something that could be vitally beneficial for our future, online education is something that Mississippi leaders have been slow to support.
Virtual schools serve as a resource for many families enrolled in charter schools across the country, but they 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. Mississippi has a virtual public high school, but it’s simply a couple courses a student can take, not a full distance learning program.
And the renewal of the Education Scholarship Account program for students with special needs strips online learning from the inclusion of educational expenses families can be reimbursed for.
Colleges and universities have led in online learning, with fully online programs long available for those who either don’t want to attend a traditional school or need the flexibility to balance their work and family. Regardless, the technology and future are here. We need to move beyond the box that education currently sits in.
Because the next time the world pauses, it would be nice if we could seamlessly flow to online learning. And for those who could benefit from online learning every day of the week, it would be nice to make that available for Mississippi students.
It is time to bring the technological future to K-12 rather than continuing to fight it.
The Senate defeated a bill that would have authorized the direct shipment of wine last night. And the vote wasn’t even close.
Senate Bill 2534, authored by Sen. Walter Michel (R-Ridgeland) and carried by Sen. Josh Harkins (R-Flowood) on the floor, would have made Mississippi the 44th state in the country to allow consumers to purchase wine and have it shipped directly to their house. Currently in Mississippi, a control state, you are limited to what the state has in stock, limiting your freedom to choose the wine you prefer. If ABC doesn't have it available, you don't have the option.
On deadline day, the bill came to the floor and was defeated 32-13. Thirteen Republicans voted for the bill, and two others that would have supported the bill paired their votes with opponents. Every other Republican voted no, as did the entire Democratic caucus.
This is the latest defeat this session, though we don’t usually see floor votes showcasing the opposition from legislators. Earlier this session, bills to allow wine in grocery stores died in committee without a vote considered in either chamber.
House Bill 981, sponsored by Rep. Brent Powell (R-Flowood), and Senate Bill 2531, sponsored by Michel, would have allowed wine to be sold in grocery stores, while providing up to six permits. You are currently limited to one permit. Wine sales in grocery stores are legal in 39 states, including Alabama, Louisiana, and Tennessee. But it will remain illegal in Mississippi, at least in 2020.
Some new establishments, including Costco in Ridgeland, Whole Foods in Jackson, and Sam’s Club in Madison, have separate establishments that sell alcohol – essentially their own liquor store attached to their main store, but not a place you can access without leaving the main grocery store. Most grocery stores can’t or won’t take on what is an unnecessary burden.
The opposition to alcohol freedom is very loud, and obviously influential with legislators.
And they don’t even hide what they are trying to do. It is liquor stores who don’t want competition, and everyone in Jackson knows that. But it shouldn’t be the job of the legislature to pick winners and losers. Coupled with the Department of Revenue who says we can’t handle the capacity of the wine needed to stock Kroger and Walmart (maybe we should remove the state from the alcohol distribution business), you have a pretty dangerous one-two punch that has outgunned citizens who overwhelmingly favor these ideas.
It is abundantly clear that most Mississippians who don’t have a vested interest in the status quo want change. They are tired of having the government make life decisions for them and would prefer that they have the ability to decide if, when, and where they purchase wine, and how it is delivered.
For a party that prides itself on free markets and competition, Republicans are very scared of anything resembling a free market for alcohol.