House Bill 609, sponsored by Rep. Bill Pigott, would outlaw the sale of goat’s milk in the state. Those who violate the law could be sentenced to 60 days in jail and pay fines up to $500.
According to state law, the state allows the sale of goat’s milk if:
- The milk is sold directly to the consumer on the production premises.
- Nine or fewer producing goats are located at the farm where the milk is sold.
- The seller can’t advertise the milk for sale.
The law also has cleanliness requirements for the milking area, including sterile containers enforced by the state Department of Health. This bill would strike the sections governing the sale of goat’s milk from the law. The current law has a repealer on it, meaning it expires at the end of the fiscal year on June 30 if action is not taken first.
Mississippi provides limited access to raw milk for consumers. The state does not allow raw milk to be sold in stores, nor can raw cow’s milk be sold for human consumption. The state currently allows on-farm sales of goat’s milk only.
According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Census of Agriculture, dairy goat herds expanded faster than any major livestock group from 2007 to 2017.
Individuals should have the freedom to purchase the milk they choose, free of government intrusion. We should be expanding access of raw milk to those who choose it, not outlawing it altogether.
MCPP has reviewed this legislation and finds that it violates our principles and therefore should be opposed.
Read HB 609.
Track the status of this and all bills in our legislative tracker.
House Bill 188, sponsored by Rep. John Hines, would mandate curriculum that homeschoolers in the state must teach.
Currently, homeschoolers have a great deal of education freedom with respect to curriculum, schedule, school hours, and reporting requirements. This bill would change that.
Under this proposal, the same Mississippi History and U.S. Government courses that government schools must teach would also be required of homeschool families and private schools.
Specifically, the proposal says, “The Mississippi History course must provide students with an examination of the history of the State of Mississippi from the age of discovery and colonization to the present with particular emphasis on the significant political, social, economic and cultural issues of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries which have impacted the diverse ethnic and racial populations of the state. All private, parochial and home-based school programs shall provide the same curriculum requirements to students enrolled in Grades 9 though 12.”
This would give the state authority to dictate what parents teach their children and how they teach it. Those rights belong with the parents who choose to homeschool, who generally make that choice because they want to set the curriculum that’s appropriate for their children free of state mandates.
Whether or not homeschool families in Mississippi teach Mississippi history or government – and we know most do – that is the choice of the parents, not the state.
MCPP has reviewed this legislation and finds that it violates our principles and therefore must be opposed.
Read HB 188.
Track the status of this and all bills in our legislative tracker.
Gaming is in good shape in Mississippi, as revenues are up for casino gaming by 3.32 percent in 2019 and the newly-formed lottery has an ambitious goal of paying back its borrowed seed money by the end of the fiscal year.
Officials from both the Mississippi Gaming Commission and the Mississippi Lottery Corporation briefed Mississippi House’s Gaming Commission at a hearing Tuesday.
Allen Godfrey, the executive director of the Gaming Commission, told the committee that while statewide gaming revenues are down from a high in 2007 of nearly $3 billion, the numbers improved slightly in 2019. Casinos earned $2.2 billion in revenue, up from nearly $2.13 billion in 2018.
The commission divides the state’s casinos into three regions: Tunica (northwest Mississippi), Lower River Region (Greenville, Vicksburg and Natchez) and the Coastal Region.
While revenues for the river cities increased from $293 million in 2018 to $304 million in 2019 and improved from $1.24 billion on the coast in 2018 to $1.31 billion in 2019, revenues from the Tunica casinos declined from $592 million in 2018 to $582 million in 2019.
Most recently, Penn National Gaming closed the Resorts Casino Tunica on June 30 as the number of casinos in Tunica shrank from nine to six.
The gaming commission regulates more casinos (26) with a smaller staff (110 full-time employees) and a smaller budget ($9.2 million) than Louisiana (20 casinos, 178 employees), Indiana (13 casinos, 218 employees) and Pennsylvania (16 casinos, 305 employees).
Since 2010, the numbers of casinos has declined from 30 to 26 and the workforce declined from 24,000 employees to 19,000.
As for the lottery, corporation president Thomas Shaheen said that the lottery was able to start earlier than its planned December launch of scratch-off tickets and has a goal of paying off its starter loan of $15 million by the end of the fiscal year on June 30.
He also said the lottery has generated sales of $12.4 million for the week that ended on February 8, with $10.9 million of that coming from scratch-off tickets. Despite only being on sale for a couple of weeks, Mega Millions ($672,677) and Powerball ($818,468) are already off a strong start.
Year to date, the lottery has generated $112 million in sales.
Shaheen said that the sales of the two will increase considerably when there are large jackpots at stake. He also said lottery tickets are for sale in all but one of the state’s 82 counties, but the lone holdout, Issaquena County, has a retailer application going through the background checks required before approval.
The lottery was authorized by an amendment to the state’s constitution in 1994, but it took until the 2018 special session of the legislature for the legislation to make it to the governor’s desk for signature.
It is supposed to provide the first $80 million in revenues for the State Highway Fund, with the excess going to the Education Enhancement Fund. Retailers will receive a six percent commission.
The gaming briefing was supposed to be a joint hearing with the Senate Gaming Committee, but debate on a controversial bill in the Senate kept the Senate members from attending.
That bill, Senate Bill 2257, would allow the State Auditor’s Office to examine tax returns of those receiving welfare benefits. It passed the Senate as amended with a two-year repealer that would force the legislature to take another look at it in two years before it expires.
The House has a similar bill that has yet to pass out of committee.
We are often tasked with criticizing government leaders and their actions due to overreach of their constitutional authority, but we recognize that occasionally legislation does in fact take tangible steps to attempt to expand, rather than limit our freedoms, and when that happens it ought to be noted.
We already have a few bills proposed by a range of legislators, who, at least on the issue of alcohol policy, seem to be attempting an expansion of personal freedom rather than a detriment.
Three bills that have emerged in the Mississippi House and Senate deserve just such credit and attempt to offer a decisive empowerment of consumer market freedom, specifically in regards to alcohol policy. Senate Bill 2304, introduced by Sen. Philip Moran, would allow for wine and liquor to be sold by stores on Sundays. House Bill 4, introduced by Rep. Brent Powell, would increase the number of liquor store permits an individual could own from one to three. Senate Bill 2031, introduced by Sen. Robert Jackson, would reduce the tax for package retailers’ permits in specific locations.
These bills are less about access to alcohol than they are about recognizing how government has intentionally suppressed a specific market, crushing the potentially large economic impact of a major industry. We wouldn’t allow the state to take similar actions regarding other businesses, so why do we turn a blind eye to the state’s strong handing of liquor and wine stores?
The question must be asked of those political defenders of prohibition-era policies: where does the line get drawn? If stifling the sale of alcohol is inherently good, then why not ban all liquor and wine sales in the state, or shut down distilleries, or limit the hours of operation so severely that stores are forced to close?
There is no philosophically consistent line by which one can defend both the free market and that an entrepreneur seeking to expand his business cannot own more than one liquor store.
Much more reform is needed before we can truly consider ourselves a state that values freedom, especially when it comes to alcohol policy. Alcohol can’t be delivered by Door Dash, Grub Hub, Postmates, or other apps, shipped to you online, sold to you before 10am or after 10pm, made by you to share with a friend, or brought in any amount by you from out of state. There’s clearly a long way to go.
However, these bills and others present a commitment to expanding freedom in the state, just as every bill should.
Senate Bill 2304, sponsored by Sen. Philip Moran, would allow for the Sunday sale of alcohol in Mississippi.
Current Mississippi law prohibits liquor stores, the only stores that sell liquor or wine, from being open on Sunday, or Christmas Day. The Christmas Day prohibition and the 10 a.m. to 10 p.m. hours of sale would remain. The current laws interfere with a business owners’ ability to run their own business, while limiting consumer choices.
This, however, is just one small part of the state’s desire to regulate, and in many cases, prohibit, legal alcohol sales in the state.
While the internet, technological developments, and more have made the purchase and production of alcohol freer and easier in other states, Mississippi has denied its citizens personal liberty on this issue.
The state has discouraged craft beer production, overregulated alcohol distribution, and cracked down on the ability for citizens to privately produce alcohol. Permits are difficult to secure, and thus many businesses have been left in the dark, unable to expand or operate.
Mississippi could make considerable strides by entrusting in its citizens a greater personal responsibility and freedom when it comes to alcohol sale and production.
There is much the state could do, but this is a step in the right direction.
MCPP has reviewed this legislation and finds that it is aligned with our principles and therefore should be supported.
Read SB 2304.
Track the status of this and all bills in our legislative tracker.
House Bill 613, sponsored by Rep. Donnie Scoggin, will allow nurse practitioners to expand their scope of practice.
Currently, nurse practitioners are required to practice in a collaboration with a physician. This would exempt them from this requirement after working for 3,600 hours.
Mississippi limits the ability of nurse practitioners to practice up to their full training — what is called “full practice authority.” In particular, nurse practitioners who wish to open their own practice, or a free-standing clinic, must enter into a collaborative agreement with a physician. This agreement requires the supervising physician to be within a 75-mile radius of the nurse’s practice location. The supervising physician is then required to randomly review up to 20 of the nurse practitioner’s patient charts and meet with the nurse practitioner once every quarter. The typical charge for this minimal (not real time) standard of review is $74 a day or $2,250 a month.
Numerous studies demonstrate that nurse practitioners provide care that is at least as good as physicians, with some studies showing even better outcomes. In part, this may be because nurse practitioners are both less expensive and more accessible, especially for rural and low-income patients. Other evidence suggests that nurse practitioners tend to follow recommended guidelines more frequently and, also, spend more time with patients — practices associated with better patient outcomes.
That is why 24 states and the District of Columbia extend full practice authority to nurse practitioners, which means nurse practitioners can independently evaluate and treat patients.
Just as Certificate of Need laws are being used to protect hospital monopolies, professional licensing and scope-of-practice regulations are being used to protect individual provider monopolies.
MCPP has reviewed this legislation and finds that it is aligned with our principles and therefore should be supported.
Read HB 613.
Track the status of this and all bills in our legislative tracker.
Imagine if Mississippi had a government agency that regulated the building of restaurants according to a centralized plan hatched by bureaucrats on the needs of the state’s foodies.
Want to open a new restaurant in (insert any city here)? This fictitious body would analyze whether there was another similar eatery in the city and whether the city’s economy could support another with the same cuisine. The fictitious agency would issue a recommendation and a hearing officer would hold a hearing and make the ultimate decision on whether to allow the restaurant to be built.
This scenario sounds ridiculous, but this is no different than the regulation of healthcare providers in the state under what is called a “Certificate Of Need.” It stifles innovation and is a protectionist racket that puts a moat around the state’s healthcare industry to prevent entry by potential competitors.
Mississippi is one of 35 states with a CON program that requires healthcare providers to seek approval from the state Department of Health to build a new facility, add beds or diagnostic equipment to an existing facility, or any other capital-related project. Want to add more beds to your hospital or nursing home? You have to ask permission. Want to bring a new piece of diagnostic equipment to your facility? Permission is needed as well. Even building a medical office building or any other capital project requires approval. Even hospital repairs after a tornado and the addition of hurricane-resistant windows to a hospital on the Gulf Coast require health department approval. This is ridiculous.
Applying for a CON starts a 90-day process that begins with a staff evaluation using a Soviet-style central planning document, the state health plan. They make a recommendation and an independent hearing officer makes a ruling that can be appealed in local court. If you’re a local provider with an existing CON, you’re good to go as more than 91 percent of these applications were approved in the last decade. The rejects are most likely new providers seeking a CON in the state.
This isn’t a free process, since attorneys are required to draft the paperwork and charge the applicants for expensive billable hours for their work. These funds could go to patient care instead. Since 15.3 percent of the CON applications over the last decade were for cost overruns on capital projects by providers, this unnecessary need to seek a rubber stamp only added to the bottom line.
Advocates for the CON say that restricting healthcare options via regulation is a cost-cutting exercise. They also say that a CON ensures that rural patients have access to providers because they would cluster centrally in metropolitan areas to be closer to the majority of their patients. Research indicates otherwise.
According to several studies by the non-profit Mercatus Center at George Mason University, states with certificate of need regulations have 99 fewer hospital beds per 100,000 than states that don’t have a CON and have fewer diagnostic machines.
These same scholars also found that patients in states with a certificate of need were more likely to have to travel outside their county to access care. The ultimate kicker in the Mercatus research is the rural hospital issue; states with CONs actually have 30 percent fewer rural hospitals per 100,000 residents.
The best way to save Mississippi’s rural hospitals and improve the quality and access to care while lowering costs is to inject competitive market forces into the state’s healthcare industry. Scrapping the state’s certificate of need program would do exactly that.
This column appeared in the Meridian Star on February 1, 2020.
House Bill 550, sponsored by Rep. Charles Young, would increase the hours of training for nail technicians from 350 to 600.
At the beginning of the session, the Board of Cosmetology said they would push for this bill. Mississippi’s 350-hour requirement is in line with the national average of 368. But a bump to 600 hours would be the second highest burden in the nation, which is shared by eight states. Only Alabama’s 750 hours would be greater.
One of the chief arguments for the additional hours was for sanitation purposes. To address that, this bill would require one hour of continuing education on sanitation from the board. If sanitation is the biggest issue, one hour hardly seems sufficient. And this is the only mention of sanitation in the law.
We should focus on decreasing the burdens to work in Mississippi and figuring out a way to teach sanitary practices within the already allotted 350 hours.
Occupational licensing leads to a decrease in the number of people working and an increase in costs to everyone. That should not be our goal. Rather, we should move toward voluntary or non-regulatory options that help entrepreneurs start and run businesses while providing the maximum options for consumers, as outlined in the High Road to Freedom.
MCPP has reviewed this legislation and finds that it violates our principles and therefore must be opposed.
Read HB 550.
Track the status of this and all bills in our legislative tracker.
The Mississippi Senate has already introduced at least two measures seeking to lower the mandatory age for kindergarten from the current standard of age six to age five.
Only nine states force five-year-old children to attend kindergarten.
Senate Bill 2062 has been introduced by state Sen. Briggs Hopson, the new chairman of the Appropriations Committee. It is one of the few bills this session that has not been double referred by leadership to two committees, meaning it might enjoy an easier road to passage. The other senate bill is SB 2022, sponsored by state Sen. David Jordan. It has been double referred.
Lt. Gov. Delbert Hosemann said that one of his first priorities will be to fully fund prekindergarten, even suggesting that we need a universal program to capture an estimated 9,000 children not participating in a program. Today, the Senate held hearings on taxpayer funded prekindergarten.
Insofar as there is no difference between state-sponsored pre-K for five-year-olds and a compulsory attendance law for five-year-olds, we treat pre-K expansion and kindergarten expansion as two sides of the same policy. It is worth noting that pre-K expansion being promoted by some in the Mississippi Senate is intended to cover four-year-olds as well.
Current state policy regarding mandatory kindergarten attendance is that if a parent has already enrolled a five-year-old in a full-day public school program, that child’s continued attendance is mandatory. In other words, attendance for five-year-olds is essentially optional. Hopson’s bill would eliminate this option and require kindergarten for all five-year-olds, even those enrolled in a private school or a home school; or at least those “which promote services that address the cognitive, social and emotional needs of five-year-old children.”
It is worth asking whether these needs are better met by forming close bonds with caregivers, like a stay-at-home parent or grandparent. In any event, educational and psychological experts agree that the best thing a five-year-old can do is play.
Here are a few facts about mandatory kindergarten/pre-K that show that it is not a common policy because the costs – fiscal, personal and social – outweigh any possible benefits:
No state requires mandatory pre-K for four-year-olds
Florida, Georgia, and Oklahoma offer universal pre-K. Participation in these programs is voluntary and is available to anyone desiring to participate. The programs are open to ages 4 through 5.
No state has close to 100 percent pre-K participation
The percentage of pre-K aged children attending a state-subsidized pre-K program vary, even within the states that offer it universally such as Florida 77 percent, Georgia 60 percent and Oklahoma 74 percent.
Pre-K and kindergarten expansion is expensive
Some states, such as Georgia, Florida and New York, have had large plans for universal pre-K without having consistent funding to implement these plans. While funding may be allocated to pre-K for a time, this often changes in times of economic downturn when states are required by to cut costs or raise taxes.
Pre-K and kindergarten expansion increases prices for working families
Universal pre-K provided by the government encourages child care providers to increase the amount they charge for their services. When children ages 3 and 4 are mostly in government pre-K programs, the higher overhead costs associated with the care of younger children (due to requirements of more staff, regulatory expenses, etc.) are no longer counterbalanced by the higher profits earned by child care providers when caring for those ages 3 and 4. In light of these factors, childcare providers are forced to increase their prices for younger children, thus amplifying calls to expand pre-K to even younger children. This same crowd out effect will occur if five-year-olds are forced to attend kindergarten.
Few states force five-year-olds to attend kindergarten
Only nine states: Arkansas, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Maryland, New Mexico, Oklahoma, South Carolina, and Virginia, as well as the District of Columbia, require compulsory attendance for 5-year-olds. These states rank anywhere from fifth (Connecticut) to 50th (New Mexico) in their K-12 educational performance ranking, undermining claims that there is even a correlation between mandatory kindergarten attendance and academic performance.
Few countries mandate pre-K for four-year-olds
Eight countries require compulsory education for four-year-olds. These are: France, Israel, Argentina, Brazil, Hungary, Greece, England, and Luxembourg. Again, these countries rank anywhere from fifth (France) to 30th (Brazil) in educational performance.
Not many countries mandate kindergarten for five-year-olds either
These countries are Cyprus, Latvia, Scotland, Netherlands and are equally as varied in their educational rankings, from ninth (Netherlands) to 50th (Latvia).
Fade out is real
A great deal of uncertainty exists regarding the actual effectiveness of pre-K in giving children an educational advantage because of the varying results and dynamics brought about by the effects of “fade out.” Fade out is the phenomena when children who attend pre-K do not later demonstrate that their time spent in a program gave them an advantage in later grades.
Not a good use of taxpayer funds
The uncertainty regarding the effectiveness of pre-K calls into question whether it merits further government funding. For instance, a landmark study of Tennessee’s pre-K program found that academic gains achieved by students in Tennessee pre-K classrooms began to fade out by first grade and vanished by third grade.
Mississippi’s pre-K program remains unproven
The Mississippi PEER Committee found in a recently released report that the Mississippi Department of Education needs a better evaluation criteria for program participants and uses a curriculum that isn’t evidence-based because it hasn’t been tested at multiple, random sites across heterogeneous populations.
Experts on the Left question pre-K
Policy groups as varied as the Brookings Institution and the National Conference of State Legislators have noted that since the actual effectiveness of pre-K in preparing children for primary school has not been verified, policies regarding pre-K should be viewed with a great degree of caution.
Experts on the Right question pre-K
The Heritage Foundation argues that since universal pre-K has not been scientifically verified to bring about its promised results, it cannot be justified enough to institute the higher taxes and further government control that it would necessitate. In short, “universal preschool may do more harm than good.” Likewise, the Cato Institute has noted that although a great deal of political rhetoric has been put forth to promote the concept of universal preschool, the empirical evidence necessary to make soundly grounded policy decisions does not support the efforts necessary to make universal pre-K a reality.