It is generally considered a good thing if there is high demand for short-term vacation rentals in your city. And the reasons for this demand in Starkville are obvious. 

From football, baseball, and basketball games at Mississippi State to events in the community throughout the year, tourism play a key role in the city’s economy. And thanks to technology, websites like Airbnb make it easier than ever for visitors to search for new options during their stay.  

While short-term rentals in the past may have consisted of advertisements in newspapers that tell you very little, consumers now have pictures, location, and feedback from previous guests. And the ability to pay via an intermediary. 

Why are people looking for this option? Short-term rentals provide the visitors with a different experience. It is usually more personal and accommodating. If you are visiting with a family, it is often the only, or at least most cost-effective, option. 

How do you know the room or house you are renting will be acceptable? The host has an incentive to provide a positive experience. As is the case with most services in our sharing economy, your reputation – and ability to stay in business – is built on customer feedback. Reputation is everything. Airbnb and other homesharing platforms are incentivized to ensure consumers and providers are not harmed. In fact, it’s in their best interest to ensure the experience is valuable and enjoyable. This is the free market.

Such technology has benefited the state, too. Last year, Airbnb remitted $1 million in taxes to the state that hosts collected. Over 69,000 guests utilized the service during that time period. Every sign indicates that these numbers will only continue to grow. Unless government gets in the way.

Which, unfortunately, is the direction many cities have gone. Some have even been sued over it. 

The city of Starkville is currently debating a short-term rental ordinance. The original proposal was draconian in nature and would have likely ended much of the short-term industry in the city. It would have limited the number of weekends and nights per year a house could be rented, imposed a $300 licensing fee, and required a homeowner to be a permanent resident to receive a permit from the city. 

Essentially, you would have to live in your house to rent out your house. Many homeowners have invested in real estate. This increases property values, which is a benefit for the city. And homeowners have an obvious incentive not just in receiving positive feedback online, but in maintaining the value of their investment. That is to say, a house being trashed is not good for anyone. 

Alternatives to the original proposal are much more user-friendly, placing no limits on rentals, lowering the licensing fee, and easing off the residency requirements. 

When it comes to the need for these ordinances, there are a couple common complaints. Noise is a popular topic. Yet, a city can pass and enforce a noise ordinance for everyone. It doesn’t require banning short-term rentals. If trash is being left behind, again, you can have ordinances concerning trash in yards. 

The truth is that the biggest opponent to Airbnb and other homesharing sites is the hotel industry. The industry naturally wants to petition government to help create a moat around their industry.

It is understandable why people working in the hotel industry are upset by this disruption and by the fact that these platforms and their users are not governed by the same regulatory burdens of the hotel industry. The same can be said of the taxi industry when Uber was launched or of virtually any business that suffers from creative disruption. The cycle is as old as capitalism.

The incumbents in these industries have paid a regulatory cost. Rather than trying to impose old regulations on new, innovative, customer-focused players, we should consider deregulating the existing industries so that competition is enhanced and innovation is incentivized. The way to achieve this is through the free market. Writing new regulations and trying to enforce old ones encourages cronyism, and only hurts local economies. Starkville should think very hard about doing anything that would limit homesharing.

At the end of the day, we have individuals who are able to earn an extra income from something they own, and tourists are able to get what they are looking for. It’s called voluntary exchange. It’s a good thing. We should encourage more of it, not try to interfere with it. 

This column appeared in the Starkville Daily News on October 6, 2019.

Black-market vaping products that have foreign substances added to them can be very dangerous. That’s obvious. But the calls for bans on vaping devices and why people are becoming sick are two different things. Unfortunately, they are being lumped together.

We know there has been an outbreak of sorts related to vaping. According to a Center for Disease Control and Prevention report, 530 people have been hospitalized with what is now known as Vaping Associated Pulmonary Illness, or VAPI. Three cases have been reported in Mississippi. Nine deaths have been reported nationally.  

This has led to the initial reaction that we have seen among some officials who have called for a ban on vaping devices, or at least the flavored products that most users prefer. Unilaterally, governors in New York and Michigan have done just that. 

Democratic gubernatorial candidate Jim Hood has also called for a ban on vaping devices. His Republican opponent, Tate Reeves, has taken a more nuanced approach.

But the illnesses and deaths do not appear to be from products sold legally at vape shops. 

A study in the New England Journal of Medicine found 84 percent of those hospitalized in Illinois and Wisconsin reported using vaping or e-cigarette devices to consume substances purchased illegally on the black market.

Typical black-market substances include THC, the active ingredient in marijuana, cannabis wax and oil, and Vitamin E.

In a release earlier this month, the FDA noted a similar finding, stating, “Many of the samples tested by the states or by the FDA as part of this ongoing investigation have been identified as vaping products containing tetrahydrocannabinol (or THC, a psychoactive component of the marijuana plant) and further, most of those samples with THC tested also contained significant amounts of Vitamin E acetate.”

They, rightfully, warned consumers to avoid black-market vaping products and to not add any substances to the products purchased in stores. 

As the early reports show, black-market products are already the problem. If we proceed to outlaw vaping or e-cigarettes, it will only create a larger black market. And likely more illnesses and deaths. 

The Hemp Cultivation Task Force held their second meeting this week as they heard from agriculture experts and law enforcement about potential ramifications of hemp legalization in Mississippi. 

Next year, the legislature will be able to act upon any recommendations or findings, or perhaps draw their own conclusions. But whatever they decide, we won’t be blazing any trails with hemp.

In fact, since the last task force meeting in July, the tiny number of states where hemp remains illegal became smaller. In July, Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine signed legislation legalizing the production of hemp in the Buckeye State. This follows the states of Georgia, Louisiana, and Texas legalizing industrial hemp earlier this year.

The states where hemp production remains illegal: Idaho, Mississippi, and South Dakota. And it remains illegal in South Dakota only because Gov. Kristi Noem vetoed a bill that would have made production legal. 

States where the cultivation of hemp is legal

We have seen a massive move toward hemp legalization at the state level after the 2018 Farm Bill expanded the cultivation of hemp. Previously, federal law did not differentiate hemp from other cannabis plants, even though you can’t get high from hemp. Because of this, it was essentially made illegal. But we did have pilot programs or limited purpose small-scale program for hemp, largely for research. 

Now, hemp cultivation is much broader, with the Farm Bill allowing the transfer of hemp across state lines, with no restrictions on the sale, transport, or possession of hemp-derived products. There are still limitations, but most states have taken the opportunity to find new markets for those who would like to cultivate hemp. Just not Mississippi. 

So as a task force brings in experts to debate the merits of hemp in Mississippi and listens to opponents in law enforcement make claims about how they would be unable to differentiate between hemp and marijuana, the rest of the state can look on as hemp is now legal for 99 percent of the country. And we can wonder why something so easy can be so difficult for Mississippi.

Mississippi lost 3,500 private sector jobs last month, while government added 1,100, reversing recent trends in both directions. 

According to the latest data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, preliminary numbers show Mississippi’s nonfarm payrolls declined from 1,171,100 in July to 1,168,700 last month. That still represents an increase of 15,000 jobs over the previous 12 months.

But the most glaring numbers from the report were the gains and losses by industry sector. Government, which accounts for nearly 21 percent of all jobs in Mississippi, added 1,100 jobs in August. Total government employment in the state now sits at 242,800. It was 240,900 a year ago. 

Industry sector changes in Mississippi over past month, July to August 2019

Not everyone had a bad August. Each of our neighboring states added jobs last month. Alabama added 2,900 jobs, Arkansas added 2,300, Louisiana added 4,800, and Tennessee added 900. 

For Louisiana, August was a turnaround in the state. They had previously lost nearly 4,000 jobs over the past year. They are now slightly on the positive side in terms of jobs created. 

Payroll changes over the past 12 months among neighboring states

Mississippi’s numbers over the past year aren’t terrible, but they certainly need to be better for long-term economic growth. To do this, we can look at other states and what the path to sustained economic prosperity looks like.

Many will claim this will come from the government. But all government can do is redistribute wealth from one person to another as it chooses, whether that’s a social welfare program or a corporate welfare one. Government only moves money around. It doesn’t create new wealth or build a bigger pie. 

Only the private sector can do that. Individual initiative is the most powerful economic engine we have. Wealth is generated when individuals risk their own resources in hopes of meeting a need in the lives of other people or businesses, and do so in a manner that earns them a profit. That need might take the form of a new product, a more efficient service, or fresh, capital needed by a business to start or expand its operations.

It’s very easy, and very tempting, for any government official to give out tax dollars, get their picture taken, and talk about how much they are doing for you and me because of that new government initiative. 

You don’t get a shovel for reducing regulations, freeing up the healthcare industry, or reforming occupational licensing. But the most helpful thing an elected official can do is be serious about pursuing policies that will make it easier for free enterprise. We’ve seen the results of our elected officials trying to manipulate, organize, and orchestrate the economy.

At the end of the day, to generate sustainable, long-term growth, the only option is to grow the private sector through lower taxes and a lighter regulatory burden. It doesn’t make for a sexy campaign slogan and many people who work in government or depend on government for jobs and contracts won’t like to hear it.

What does that look like?

There are numerous policy ideas lawmakers can and should consider to positively change the economic trajectory of the state.

1. Reform scope-of-practice and certificate of need laws to provide more access and competition in healthcare.

2. Eliminate overburdensome occupational licensing regimes that often only serve to keep entrepreneurs out of a specific industry or field of work. 

3. Reduce our state’s regulatory burden that makes it more difficult and more expensive to operate a business in the state.

In this episode of Unlicensed, we talk with Dr. Robert Graboyes of the Mercatus Center at George Mason University about the future of healthcare in America. Graboyes is the author of Fortress and Frontier in American Healthcare, a paper that examines the needed mentality shift in healthcare.

This week, the Mississippi Charter School Authorizer Board approved the ninth charter school in the state.

The Board approved Leflore Legacy Academy in Greenwood which will serve grades 6 through 8 when it reaches capacity. This is the second charter school in the Delta. Clarksdale Collegiate Public Charter School opened last year.

For the 2019-2020 school year, six charters are open in Mississippi. Two others, in addition to Leflore Legacy, have been approved and are set to open in future years.

Last year, 14 charter operators began the application process. Four made to the final cut, with just the one receiving the state's blessing.

Voters will have the opportunity to approve medical marijuana next fall. If approved, what exactly would that look like?

Mississippi has 20 plus years of history and 33 other states to look back upon. Here is how the process would work, according to Medical Marijuana 2020, the organization leading the ballot initiative.

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:

• Cancer
• Epilepsy and other seizure-related ailments
• Huntington’s disease
• Multiple sclerosis
• Post-traumatic stress disorder
• HIV
• AIDS
• Chronic pain
• ALS
• Glaucoma
• Chrohn’s disease
• Sickle cell anemia
• Autism with aggressive or self-harming behavior
• Spinal cord injuries

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.

If approved, the program will be up and running no later than August 15, 2021 according to the initiative's wording.

In 2018, voters in Missouri, Oklahoma, and Utah approved ballot initiatives to legalize medical marijuana. Two years prior, voters in Arkansas, Florida, and North Dakota did the same thing. 

The trend lines are obvious: What began as initiatives in largely blue states, or libertarian leaning western states, has now spread to traditionally Republican states. And we have even begun to see Republican legislatures in states like Louisiana, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and West Virginia approving medical marijuana. 

And next fall, Mississippi voters will have the opportunity to make the Magnolia State the 34th state to legalize medical marijuana. Medical Marijuana 2020, the team behind the ballot initiative, recently submitted over 100,000 certified signatures to the secretary of state. 

If history, and momentum, is any guide, the campaign has a good chance of success even as statewide officials and candidates struggle with the issue that is very popular according to internal polling.

A history of how medical marijuana became legal by state

During the 2019 session, the Georgia and Texas legislatures approved medical marijuana though the rollout has not been finalized. 

What would medical marijuana look like in Mississippi

If the ballot initiative is approved by voters in November, marijuana would be legal for those with a debilitating medical condition and would have to be authorized by a physician and receive it from a licensed treatment center.

Some of these conditions include:

• Cancer
• Epilepsy and other seizure-related ailments
• Huntington’s disease
• Multiple sclerosis
• Post-traumatic stress disorder
• HIV
• AIDS
• Chronic pain
• ALS
• Glaucoma
• Chrohn’s disease
• Sickle cell anemia
• Autism with aggressive or self-harming behavior
• Spinal cord injuries

If a 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.

That individual then becomes a qualified patient. After they do this, they present the physician certification to the Mississippi Department of Health and are 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.

The Mississippi Department of Health would regulate the cultivation of marijuana, processing, and being made available to patients. There would also be limits on how much marijuana a patient could obtain.

New regulations will allow vegan and vegetarian food companies to continue using meat or meat product terms on their labels. 

In July, the Institute for Justice and Mississippi Justice Institute partnered to bring a First Amendment lawsuit against the State of Mississippi concerning proposed regulations that would have banned plant-based foods from using meat product terms like “burger,” “bacon,” and “hot dog” on their packaging. The new regulations are the result of the lawsuit.

“These new proposed regulations are a victory for free speech in Mississippi,” said Aaron Rice, Director of the Mississippi Justice Institute. “It shouldn’t be a crime for plant-based food companies to describe their products in a way that everyone understands.  We are happy that our state officials listened to the concerns brought forward by our clients in this lawsuit, and took the right approach. Because of these changes in the regulations, our clients will be able to continue selling vegan and vegetarian products in Mississippi.”

Under the new regulations, plant-based foods will not be considered to be labeled as a “meat” or “meat food product” if the label also includes “meat-free,” “meatless,” “plant-based,” “vegetarian,” “vegan,” or similar terms. 

The proposal will be open for public comment for 25 days. 

The proposed regulations can be found here.