close

Mississippi voters who haven’t already cast absentee ballots head to the polls tomorrow to vote for numerous offices and initiatives. 

At the top of the ticket, Mississippians will be choosing from President Donald Trump, former Vice President Joe Biden, and seven other candidates, including Kanye West, for president. In 2016, Mississippi gave Trump 58 percent of the vote. Mississippi last voted for a Democratic presidential candidate in 1976.

Mississippians will also be voting in a rematch for United States Senator. Two years ago, Cindy Hyde-Smith, who had been appointed earlier in the year by then-Gov. Phil Bryant, defeated former Congressman Mike Espy 54-46. That was to fill the remainder of former Sen. Thad Cochran’s term. Hyde-Smith is vying for a full six-year term Tuesday. Hyde-Smith and Espy will match up again, along with Libertarian Jimmy Edwards. 

Only Rep. Steven Palazzo is unopposed for re-election in South Mississippi among Mississippi’s four Congressional seats. Rep. Trent Kelly faces Democrat Antonia Eliason. Rep. Bennie Thompson faces Republican Brian Flowers. And Rep. Michael Guest meets Democrat Dorothy Beneford. 

Two of the four Supreme Court justices on the ballot have opposition this year. Justice Kenny Griffis was appointed to the Court in 2018 and faces Latrice Westbrooks in the nonpartisan election. This district, officially District 1, covers central Mississippi, ranging from Republican suburbs of Rankin and Madison counties to Democratic strongholds of Hinds county, along with much of the Delta. While the positions are officially non-partisan, much of the Republican establishment and aligned-business groups have backed Griffis, while most Democrats, including Thompson, are supporting Westbrook in the slightly Democratic district. 

In the Northern District, Justice Josiah Coleman faces Percy Lynchard for the District 3 seat. Leslie King is unopposed for another seat in District 1, while Mike Randolph is unopposed in District 2, the southern district. 

Mississippians will also see three questions. 

The first question, which has garnered the most attention, is a ballot initiative to make Mississippi the 35th state to adopt medical marijuana. Last spring, the legislature put an alternative on the ballot, which makes this a two-part question. The first question will ask if you want either. It's an either or neither proposition. If a majority say neither, the second question doesn't matter. If a majority says either, then whichever option (the original ballot initiative or the alternative) receives a majority is enacted, provided it receives at least 40 percent of the ballots cast. 

The second measure removes the electoral vote requirement for statewide elections. Right now, the state House votes on the governor if a candidate does not receive a majority of the vote and majority of legislative districts. If enacted, this removes that requirement and would move to a runoff system between the top two vote getters if no one receives a majority. 

The final measure is adoption of the new state flag. This summer the legislature took up the issue, removed the current flag, and a commission created a new flag for voters to vote on. If a majority vote against it, a new flag option would be designed and vote upon in 2021. 

According to the Secretary of State, you will not need to wear a mask to enter a polling place. 

Mississippians will cast their votes for president, a United States Senate race, each Congressional seat, medical marijuana, a new state flag, and more on November 3.

Here’s a breakdown to make it easier to vote. 

Who can vote in Mississippi?

Every U.S. citizen who possesses the following qualifications is eligible to register to vote in Mississippi: 

How do I register to vote?

You can register to vote in person or by mail in Mississippi. Regardless of the option you select, you must register by Monday, October 5. If you are registering by mail, it must be postmarked by that date. 

To register by mail, you must complete a mail-in voter registration application. Provide the information requested, including your driver’s license number and/or the last four digits of your Social Security number. Then, send your Mail-In Voter Registration Application to the Circuit Clerk’s Office located in the county of your residence. 

Want a mail-in voter registration form? Click here. 

You can register in person at the Circuit Clerk’s Office, Municipal Clerk’s Office, Department of Public Safety, or any state or federal agency offering government services, such as the Department of Human Services. 

What forms of photo ID are required to vote?

All voters must show photo identification when voting in person. Any of the following photo IDs may be used: 

Expired identification cards are acceptable as long as they have not been expired for more than 10 years. 

How do I find my precinct?

Every address is located within a specific precinct and polling place. Not sure how to find your precinct? Click here to enter your address and find your polling place.

How do I vote absentee?

Some registered voters are eligible to vote by an absentee ballot because of age, health, work demands, temporary relocation for educational purposes, or their affiliation with the U.S. Armed Forces. Please check with your Circuit or Municipal Clerk to determine if you are entitled to vote by an absentee ballot and to learn the procedures for doing so. 

And this year the legislature added COVID-19 patients under physician-imposed quarantine, or anyone caring for a dependent who is such a patient, as eligible to vote absentee.

If you know you will vote by an absentee ballot, you may contact your Circuit or Municipal Clerk’s Office at any time within 45 days of the election. 

This year’s Independence Day feels different. A population of societal disintegrationists, who are increasing in either volume or size or both, are attacking America’s foundational concepts. 

In their retro-judgment of historical actors and damning of every American foundational concept and document that was ever touched by even a single figure who did not comply one hundred percent with modern social justice norms, they miss the key point: the ideas that gave rise to our nation’s founding were radical and revolutionary at the time, and they remain radical and revolutionary today. 

On July 4, 1776, when the Declaration of Independence was issued, no government had declared that God created all men equal with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. The very people they damn were the first to do so – very woke for 1776. 

The Founders provided a Constitutional framework that has permitted our nation’s growth into the most free, prosperous, and powerful nation in history. It has not been without scars, but this is not surprising. People are imperfect beings, and the fight for freedom has never been easy – not in any place across time and not in any place in the world. 

That is true here. 

Freedom has always required struggle, and it will require struggle to maintain it (see Hong Kong today). The good news is that through starts and stops, steps forward and backward, the arc of our nation has pointed towards more liberty, not less. This is an affirmation that our basic Constitutional architecture is sound, and it is critical to recognize this. We are here today, having the discussions we are having about fulfilling the promise of liberty, because of our Constitutional framework and not in spite of it. 

Very importantly, the disintegrationists also miss that the Founder’s Declaration remains radical and revolutionary today, and one wonders if they would issue the same foundational framework to government – respecting the God-given right of the individual to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness – if their seeming goal of some type of new order was achieved. They topple statues of Washington, Jefferson, Grant, a Priest and Saint, a former slave, Cervantes, and this week in Portland an Elk (as in the animal). 

It is difficult to identify a consistent theme or purpose to the vandalism other than destruction for the sake of it, and all of it is done with the perfect lens and judgment of 2020 Wokeness. It is as if the disintegrationists believe they are the only good people who have ever existed, in this time and place, and if you had dropped them in 1825 America, England, or even Prussia or Russia, they would still be thinking exactly as they do now, marching the streets and stumping for today’s constantly evolving ideas about social justice.

They have separated the persons they critique from their historical contexts – as if history and place doesn’t matter – and they themselves would think the same as they do in 2020 regardless of whether and where they lived in 1312, 1515, 1776, or 2020. It doesn’t work that way. We are all a product of our historical era. The journey of our nation is about progress, not perfection.

This year has brought a discernible shift in in our societal conversation from a focus on the individual to a focus on groups. In other words, identity politics. This groups gets this, that group gets that. This shift has been occurring for quite some time, but seems to have accelerated of recent. There are consequences to this type of shift and reframing of focal point from individual to group. 

The Founders focused on the individual because it is ultimately the best way to protect everyone, regardless of group membership. They tethered rights to the individual, and importantly, recognized these rights are granted by God (because if rights are granted by God, your fellow man can never do anything to take them away). 

The problem with a shift to a focus on groups is that it inevitably leads to the tug-of-war of interests between groups, and in the process the canceling of the very individual rights it nominally seeks to protect. It is important to note that it is not that data on how policies affect particular demographics are not helpful. That data can be. It’s that problems start to occur when everything is framed as group struggle. 

We need to replace the focus on the individual, and in so doing we can best address grievances of individuals within groups. There is no better way. 

The irony of the claim by disintegrationists that America is inherently evil is that it is our very capacity for self-assessment and introspection that has permitted our progress towards more liberty, not less, over time. As they shout from the mountaintops about how inherently evil our institutions are, we undertake in earnest a conversation about our shortcomings and how we can best fulfill the promises of the Declaration of Independence going forward. 

In the words of Peggy Noonan, “We’ve overcome a great deal. We see this best when we don’t deny our history but tell the whole messy, complicated, embarrassing, ennobling tale.” The Great Conversation has always occurred here. Other nations are not taking their personal inventories like we constantly are. Let’s keep it that way. 

Have a great Independence Day, and be thankful for our freedom.

Rather quietly, the state legislature unanimously passed a bill this year that will break down barriers to work for military families in Mississippi. 

The Military Family Freedom Act, or Senate Bill 2117, will allow military members and their families to receive occupational licenses in Mississippi based on their education and training they received in another state, rather than having to jump through new government hoops again. SB 2117 was sponsored by Sen. Chuck Younger and included a number of other champions including Sen. Mike Seymour and Reps. Bubba Carpenter and Steve Hopkins. 

Today, about one in five need a license to work, a strong contrast from the 1950s when just five percent of the population needed permission from the government to earn a living. The impact on military families is even more pronounced than the public as a whole. Data from over the past year – before governments shut down the economy because of the coronavirus pandemic – showed military spouses had unemployment rates that ranged from 20 to 25 percent. 

Why do we see this? One of the reasons is the obvious. The average military family moves every two to three years, meaning new town, new schools, new lives, and, if the spouse is working, a new job for him or her. 

But obtaining an occupational license from another state, which includes new classes and testing, doesn’t make finding a new job easy, and it certainly doesn’t make it quick. By the time the paperwork and testing are completed, and you receive a license and then find a new job, you will likely be moving before too long. This process then repeats itself with every move. Eventually it gets to the point that it isn’t worth it. And we see absurdly high unemployment rates for military spouses. 

With the new law, applicants are eligible to receive a license if they have held a license in good standing for at least one year and they completed testing or training requirements in the initiating state. Boards no longer have to attempt to compare education or training across the 50 states, and an applicant is able to continue with the work they were already trained for and successfully doing prior to the move to Mississippi.

If an individual comes from a state that does not require a license, they would have a clear pathway to licensure in Mississippi if they have worked for at least three years in that field. 

Moreover, boards are required to issue a temporary license if an application may take longer than two weeks to process. Considering that some boards may meet just monthly, or even quarterly, this will help an individual start working sooner.  

Military families do not forget how to practice their trade upon relocating to another state. This bill recognizes that, but it is true of everyone who moves to Mississippi with an occupational license from another state. 

Last year, Arizona became the first state in the nation to pass universal recognition, meaning Arizona will recognize your occupational license even if that state doesn’t recognize a license from Arizona. Since that time, over 1,000 individuals who would probably still be working on obtaining a license if this law didn’t pass have applied for and been granted a license to work in a variety of fields in Arizona. Six states – Montana, Pennsylvania, Utah, Idaho, Iowa, and Missouri – have since followed. 

At a time when so many are out of work, and we don’t yet have a firm grasp of what the economy will look like in the near future, freeing everyone to work should be a priority. That is especially true of a state like Mississippi that has been on the wrong side of domestic migration for several years.

Because if we wait until we’re the last state to make this change, we will see little of the positive benefit we would see from being a leading state. 

This column appeared in the Starkville Daily News on July 1, 2020.

A flag is a symbol meant to unite a broad diversity of individuals under a common bond. It has become inarguable that the state flag of Mississippi, adopted by the legislature in 1894, no longer does so, and that is why we are in favor of replacing our current flag.

We do not discount the heartfelt meaning, often out of respect for their ancestors, that the current flag holds for many Mississippians who have known no other. However, we must not discount that particularly for many of our state’s black citizens it as a symbol of oppression and reflective of a time when their ancestors were denied the rights promised to all by America’s founding ideals.

Unlike what we see in cities across America, Mississippians are not looting, rioting, or destroying property, private or public. There are no rage-filled authoritarian mobs toppling statues and desecrating buildings. Instead, church leaders, business owners, elected officials, and private citizens have peacefully marched together and are deeply engaged in thoughtful and productive debate/conversation. It’s a model the nation should copy. If we love and empathize with our fellow man, we lend an ear to his perspective, even in disagreement, and we don’t assume evil motives. If we have to scream or demean to engage, it is likely that our argument is lacking in merit and in empathy.

It should be noted that we don’t come to this view because of the economic pressures applied by corporations, sports conferences, and celebrities. In fact, we believe denying economic benefits to athletes, local communities, entrepreneurs, and workers in order to achieve a political victory is counter to representative government and a dangerous way to make law. The citizens of Mississippi did not elect sports commissioners or corporate CEOs, but we did elect 52 Senators and 122 Representatives in a state of only three million people who are charged to represent us and who are authorized to act now in a bold and meaningful way, while still including the citizens of Mississippi in the process.

Our state legislature is empowered to take the first step now; to take down the current flag and then allow the citizens of Mississippi to engage in a process to determine exactly what should replace it. We could go without a state flag until that process is completed or we could simply replace the symbol of the Confederate Battle flag with the state’s official seal and motto as an interim step. 

There has been a significant swing in public sentiment in Mississippi on this issue, too. It’s not just Jackson’s elite, university leaders, and the economic development leaders who favor removing the current flag. A public opinion poll, conducted by the Tarrance Group last week, found 55 percent of voters favored changing the flag, which is a significant change from the results in 2019 when 54 percent of voters favored keeping the current flag. When asked about changing to a flag that includes the state seal and the motto, support for the change jumped to 72 percent. Of note, the survey showed support from a majority of both black and white Mississippians.

Although Mississippi, like other states, has a dark history of unequal treatment of some of its citizens, it’s also a place that has made remarkable progress over the last half century. The contributions of black and white Mississippians to music, literature, sports, politics, and visual arts are legendary. Our place as America’s most religious state, and one of its most generous, is well-earned.

From Ocean Springs to Tupelo, from Oxford to Laurel, and from Starkville to Natchez, Mississippi often defines what it is to be Southern and what it is to be American. James Earl Jones, Morgan Freeman, B.B. King, Muddy Waters, Robert Johnson, Jimmy Buffett, Elvis Presley, Leontyne Price, Bo Diddly, Oprah Winfrey, Tennessee Williams, William Faulkner, Eudora Welty, John Grisham, Donna Tartt, Jerry Rice, Walter Payton, Brett Favre, and Archie Manning are just some of the gifts Mississippi has given to the nation. 

There is much to be proud of in Mississippi, America’s “Hospitality State.” We can honor that name by removing a flag that doesn’t represent all of our citizens. We won’t do so because powerful outsiders tell us to. We will do it because we love our neighbors enough to give up a symbol that stirs the hearts of some for one that doesn’t pain the hearts of others. We’re not suggesting we destroy the symbols or monuments of our shared history.

Rather, let’s honor all of our ancestors by leaning together into a future that delivers on the promise of one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. All of America could benefit from such a show of unity.

The legislature hit their most recent deadline yesterday as committees had to report on bills that originated in the opposite chamber. Everything that did not clear a committee yesterday is dead for the year. 

It was a mix of a day, but a number of liberty bills remain alive in some form or fashion.

In this episode of Unlicensed, MCPP's Jameson Taylor speaks with Rep. Kent McCarty about the concept behind Learn to Earn. This is innovative legislation McCarty has authored that would expand alternative learning opportunities for students in Mississippi.

Follow: Spotify / Apple

Should someone who was allegedly trying to use a counterfeit bill be subject to the death penalty? Obviously, the answer is no, but as we know that is the story of George Floyd. Because of excessive police force, another man has lost his life and his future. 

This has led to varied reactions, from peaceful protests to violent riots to turning off the television or shutting down social media. Wherever you may fit, we know something needs to change. When it comes to police reform policy, where does that start?

End the practice of qualified immunity. When it comes to reform, few items have received more attention than what is known as qualified immunity, a practice that essentially shields law enforcement and all government officials from accountability for their actions. 

This is a creation of the Supreme Court and because of it Floyd’s family would likely have their claims against the officers dismissed because there isn’t a case from the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals (the jurisdiction for Minnesota) or the U.S. Supreme Court specifically holding that it is unconstitutional for police to kneel on the neck of a handcuffed man for nine minutes. With qualified immunity, you need to show that the rights were “clearly established.” A high and unnecessary bar. 

What does that look like? In Georgia, deputies attempted to shoot a dog, who did not even pose a threat, missed, and hit a 10-year-old child. The family of the child filed suit, but that was rejected by the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals because they could not find precedent declaring this type of conduct unconstitutional. The 11th Circuit even added that the officer should be protected because the officer meant to shoot the dog – not the child.    

Currently, the Supreme Court is hearing 13 different petitions to reconsider qualified immunity and a bill has been introduced in Congress to abolish the practice. 

Require liability insurance for law enforcement. Similar to medical malpractice insurance for doctors, liability insurance for law enforcement would hold individual officers accountable rather than shifting the burden to taxpayers for agency-wide payouts. Essentially, this incentivizes good behavior as fewer mistakes equates to lower costs. Very similar to your auto or home insurance. Conversely, if an officer becomes too high of a risk, they would become uninsurable, which is probably a good sign they shouldn’t be employed. 

On a similar note, we could prevent future uses of force by stripping certification for misconduct. This could be done by a council that is made up of civilians and/or elected officials. 

End the militarization of law enforcement. Local law enforcement agencies are allowed to freely acquire surplus military equipment for their work. This could include tanks, grenade launchers, helicopters, assault rifles, and various other military items. Law enforcement and the military are not the same thing, and do not do the same work. The legislature should prohibit agencies in Mississippi from participating in this program. 

Require body cameras. Because of technology, we have been able to see numerous examples of police misconduct that we otherwise might not have. But we should continue to move forward with policy that requires body camera use when force is being used by an officer or when a warrant is being served. After all, cameras show us not just wrongdoings of officers, but they can protect officers from dubious claims. If funding is needed, the legislature can create a grant program from forfeiture funds and oversee the disbursement of funds to local agencies. 

Require reporting of misconduct by fellow officers. Officers should hold each other accountable, but we have reporting from the Department of Justice that says that usually isn’t the case. According to the report, 84 percent of police officers have seen colleagues use excessive force on civilians, and 61 percent admit they don’t always report ‘even serious criminal violations that involve abuse of authority by fellow officers.’

Instead, we should legally require officers to report their colleagues who abuse their power and use excessive force. If they don’t, they should be held accountable. And those who bring forward complaints about misconduct should be protected from retaliation. 

We all want to live in safe communities. We all want to support law enforcement. But we cannot continue to turn a blind eye on those who are suffering because of bad actors. Those individuals need to be held accountable. But that won’t happen until we have the will to make the necessary reforms.

This column appeared in the Clarion Ledger on June 3, 2020.

Senate Bill 2053, sponsored by Sen. Angela Hill, will prohibit public officials from appearing in publicly funded advertisements during an election year.

Public officials would not be able to use taxpayer funds for advertisements that use their name, voice, or likeness starting on January 1 of an election year. This includes radio, television, internet, newspaper, and billboard advertisements.

Taxpayer funds would also not be allowed to sponsor a convention, conference, or seminar organized by a lobbyist. The legislation does expressly permit the continued use of taxpayer funds for association membership fees and registration and attendance of a convention, conference, or seminar.

MCPP has reviewed this legislation and finds that it is aligned with our principles and therefore should be supported. 

Read the bill here.  

Track the status of this bill and all bills in our legislative tracker. 

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