The most common refrain of prominent Mississippi elected officials who have long rejected the expansion of Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act — that the state cannot afford the costs of the program — was refuted this week by the state’s leading economic expert.
State Economist Corey Miller, a researcher employed by the state’s public university system, released a comprehensive report this week showing that expanding Medicaid would effectively pay for itself and the state would incur no new expenditures.
Under the Affordable Care Act, the federal government would cover 90% of the health care costs related to expansion, while Mississippi would have to cover 10%. The economists found that the 10% state match would be more than covered by health care-related savings to the state and new tax revenue generated.
Two of Mississippi’s most prominent elected officials — Gov. Tate Reeves and Speaker of the House Philip Gunn — oppose Medicaid expansion, repeating that the state cannot afford the costs. But this week’s research directly refutes their claim for Mississippi, one of just 12 states that have not expanded Medicaid.
“Based on our estimates of the costs and savings associated with Medicaid expansion, Mississippi could enter Medicaid expansion in 2022 and incur little to no additional expenditures for at least the first decade of expansion,” Miller and senior economist Sondra Collins wrote in the report.
What’s at stake, the researchers found, is providing health care coverage to between 228,000 and 233,000 Mississippians who are not currently insured. This estimate primarily includes Mississippians who politicians often refer to as the “working poor” — people who are employed but cannot afford health insurance.
Mississippi, if leaders chose to expand Medicaid, would have to foot a bill between $186 million and $207 million from 2022 to 2027, the researchers found. But cost savings to the state in several other areas — most significantly from reductions in uncompensated care costs that the state’s hospitals must currently cover — would more than offset the costs to the state in at least the first 10 years of expansion, the research found.
The report was released this week, as there’s more incentive than ever to expand Medicaid. In addition to covering 90% of the costs, the federal government would provide Mississippi an additional $600 million to expand Medicaid under recent legislation passed by Congress. Mississippi lawmakers would have virtually no limitations on what they could spend that money on.
In addition to the health care benefits, the researchers showed that expansion would be an economic boon to the state, creating almost 11,300 jobs a year between 2022 to 2027. A majority of these jobs would be added in the health care and social assistance sector.
Medicaid expansion would also increase the state’s gross domestic product (GDP) each year between about $719 million and $783 million, and it would increase the state’s general fund revenue by about $44 million per year. That added revenue would come primarily from an increase in individual income tax collections, the researchers found.
Additionally, Medicaid expansion would also increase the state’s population by about 3,300 to 11,500 new residents per year between 2022 and 2027. This is notable given that Mississippi was one of just three states in the U.S. to lose population between 2010-2020.
Similar reports from economists in recent years have not moved several prominent elected officials. Reeves, an ardent opponent of Medicaid expansion, will not hear a question about expanding without quickly using the term “Obamacare” and promising to never support it.
Gunn is also among prominent leaders to reject talks of Medicaid expansion.
“I am not open to Medicaid expansion,” Gunn said at the end of the 2021 legislative session in April. “… I don’t see Medicaid expansion as something that is beneficial to the state of Mississippi. I just don’t think the taxpayers can afford it. That is what it boils down to is the taxpayers. It is their money. I just don’t have taxpayers calling saying we want you to raise taxes so we can expand Medicaid.”
Gunn argued that the “most sick, those who are the poorest” have health care coverage now. He said expansion is “to bring in another class of citizens who are not in the lowest category. This would be the next tier up. I just do not think we can afford it.”
Lt. Gov. Delbert Hosemann is open to considering some version of Medicaid expansion, though he will not refer to it by that term. The Senate, under Hosemann’s leadership, plans to hold hearings on the issue in October.
“We are working on making healthcare more accessible and affordable in Mississippi,” Hosemann said in July at the Neshoba County Fair. “The time for simply saying ‘no’ to our options for working Mississippians has passed. When a cancer diagnosis can bankrupt a family, we have a responsibility to help. Further, no Mississippian should be further than 30 minutes from an emergency room.”
While most Mississippi politicians have touted their commitment to a pay raise for public school teachers, Wednesday’s hearing will be the first comprehensive legislative study of the issue in several years.
“I am just trying to glean, learn as much information as possible about teacher pay and the benefits that go with the salary teachers receive,” said Senate Education Committee Chair Dennis DeBar, R-Leakesville.
DeBar added, “We are looking at what we can do to retain teachers and entice education students to go into teaching.”
Those scheduled to appear at the Senate Education Committee meeting Wednesday at the Capitol include a representative of the Southern Regional Education Board, who presumably will discuss how the pay for Mississippi teachers lags behind the regional average, and state economist Corey Miller. Also scheduled are representatives from the Public Employees Retirement System and from the state health insurance program, both of whom will talk about the benefits package that teachers receive.
No Mississippi teacher is on the agenda to speak before the committee this week. Teachers were asked to provide written comments ahead of time.
“We are hopeful that tomorrow’s hearing is illustrative of a shift in thinking among state leaders and legislators, and representative of an understanding that education funding — and specifically teachers’ salaries — is more than just appropriations,” Mississippi Association of Educators President Erica Jones said. “They’re an investment in the future of our state.”
Kelly Riley, executive director of the Mississippi Professional Educators, said, “We appreciate the Senate Education Committee studying teacher compensation in Mississippi and for the Senate’s commitment to developing a long-range plan to increase Mississippi’s average teacher salary to be competitive with that of other states in the region. Mississippi’s teacher shortage is impacting districts throughout our state. In the current 2021-22 school year, 90 local districts, seven charter schools and one early college high school are designated as 2021-22 Critical Shortage Geographical Areas. This compares to 41 districts being identified as 2016-2017 Critical Shortage Geographical Areas just five years ago.”
In his successful 2019 gubernatorial election, Gov. Tate Reeves campaigned on increasing teacher pay by $4,300. But his first budget proposal released before the 2020 legislative session did not specify funds for a teacher pay raise. But in July at the Neshoba County Fair, he proposed a $3,300 pay raise over three years. That, coupled with the $1,000 pay raise approved by legislators and signed into law by the governor at the end of the 2021 session, would allow Reeves to honor his campaign promise.
Lt. Gov. Delbert Hosemann also pledged to make teacher pay a priority during his successful 2019 campaign for lieutenant governor. It is the Senate, where Hosemann now presides, holding Wednesday’s hearing.
“Recent pay raises have absolutely been a step in the right direction,” Jones said. “That said, as we continue to grapple with the state’s teacher shortage crisis and the knowledge that Mississippi teachers still struggle to make ends meet, it’s important to remember that sporadic pay raises won’t help us to recruit and retain teachers or allow teachers to quit their second and third jobs.
“We need to work together to develop a bold, long-term teacher pay plan that will help stop the hemorrhaging of teachers who can’t afford to stay in the classroom and allow us to pay these hardworking professionals a salary reflective of their value,” Jones continued.
In the 2000 session, legislators passed what is still the state’s largest teacher pay raise. Lawmakers that year passed a $337 million proposal that was enacted over a six-year period. That pay raise is equivalent to $523.9 million in today’s dollars.
“Too many Mississippi teachers are having to work second and third jobs to make ends meet,” Riley said. “Mississippi teachers are professionals and should be respected and compensated as such. It is critical that they be paid a salary that is reflective of their professional practice.”
The state education department deemed the Canton Public School District’s federally funded after-school program high risk and may require the district to pay back around $42,000 of federal dollars, according to a recent report.
The federal programs compliance report came several months after a Mississippi Today story highlighted issues in the district, including parents’ complaints that their children’s after school program was inexplicably stopped just months into the school year.
Terrical Travis and Krystal Williams’ children were receiving extra help through the program, called the 21st Century Community Learning Centers Grant Program. But both received messages from their children’s teachers saying the program was discontinued “due to unforeseen circumstances.”
Williams received the message from her son Ca’Marion’s teacher in November of 2020, and he was not able to receive extra help for the rest of the year. At the end of the school year he was told he would have to repeat the grade.
His mom now says he is in the same grade as his sister and “doesn’t take to school” like he did in kindergarten, where he was named a “star student,” and first grade.
The district has maintained it ran the program at every elementary school through March of 2021.
But the Mississippi Department of Education’s report released late last month found that although the district reported it operated the program from November 2020 through March 2021, “The district halted the 21st CCLC Program in January 2021, and the MDE Office of Federal Programs was not notified of any such program changes,” an Aug. 26 letter to the district from Judy Nelson, executive director of federal programs for the Mississippi Department of Education, said.
LaToshia Stamps, Canton’s federal program director, declined to answer questions from Mississippi Today.
“The monitoring report has been received and reviewed accordingly,” she said in an emailed statement. “No further comments will be available until all areas have been satisfied and cleared respectively.”
As a result, the Mississippi Department of Education will now consider the program “high risk,” meaning the district is subject to drop-in visits from the department officials along with increased monitoring of attendance records, time sheets, and expenditures of funds, said Nelson.
In the letter to the district, Nelson said district officials told the department the discontinuation of the program was due to the schools being completely virtual last year.
Nelson said the district told the Mississippi Department of Education that because school was virtual all year long, an after school program that was also virtual was not effective.
The state also identified $42,618.57 in questioned costs of federal funds spent in the 2019-2020 school year. The majority were for that school year’s iteration of the 21st Century program, including around $3,000 worth of equipment such as laptops and a projector cart that could not be located at the time of the monitoring visit, according to the report.
The report also noted that the district “failed to provide documentation that it remained in compliance of ESEA (Elementary and Secondary Education Act ) with Immigrant funding,” or a federal funding source for extra support services for English learners and immigrant students.
If the district can provide the documentation to the department to show the funds were properly spent, they will not have to be repaid, Nelson explained.
Eighty-nine percent of incarcerated people inside Mississippi’s three state-operated prisons are fully vaccinated, according to data obtained by Mississippi Today.
While Mississippi Department of Correction officials boast high vaccination rates in comparison to the state as a whole, some within these facilities say they were never informed about which vaccine they received and are still waiting on their second shot, leaving them vulnerable to infection because they are not fully protected.
“I only had one Pfizer shot,” Linda Ross, a woman in prison at Central Mississippi Correctional Facility, told Mississippi Today. “I keep putting in medical, clinical forms and sick calls. I had one COVID shot about four months ago, and I haven’t had another one since then. And I don’t see one in sight yet.”
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommends the second dose of the Moderna and Pfizer BioNTech COVID-19 vaccines be administered within a month after the first dose. Women in the state’s largest prison, CMCF in Pearl, tell Mississippi Today they have only received the first dose five months ago, leaving them partially vaccinated and more vulnerable to a serious COVID-19 infection than fully vaccinated people.
According to data obtained by Mississippi Today, MSDH distributed over 31,000 doses of COVID-19 vaccines to MDOC and VitalCore, MDOC’s contracted healthcare provider, between Jan. 30 and Aug. 11.
MDOC Assistant Deputy Commissioner Leo Honeycutt said as of Aug. 26, 90% of the population at the Mississippi State Penitentiary was fully vaccinated and 93% received at least one dose. In the South Mississippi Correctional Institution, 82% were fully vaccinated and 93% received at least one dose.
He said 99% of incarcerated people at CMCF are fully vaccinated. It is at CMCF where incarcerated women say they are still waiting to receive the second dose of the COVID-19 vaccine, but MDOC said in a statement it will vaccinate any incarcerated person who asks for a shot.
“The second dose has been administered to the overwhelming majority of inmates. MDOC stands ready to administer the second dose of the vaccine to any additional inmate that requests it,” Honeycutt told Mississippi Today.
However, Ross said she’s put in multiple requests to receive the second dose of the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine to no avail. She said her zone was under quarantine from the end of August until early September because someone in the neighboring zone tested positive for COVID-19.
“I have underlying medical conditions. I have (hepatitis) C, so I should’ve been one of the first ones on the list (to get the second shot),” Ross said.
Sherri Murray and another woman in prison at CMCF who asked to remain anonymous out of fear of retaliation also said they received one shot in March and haven’t been able to get the second shot since then. They said they’ve repeatedly asked prison officials about getting the second dose and were never told which vaccine, Pfizer BioNTech or Moderna, they originally received in March.
Six weeks after getting the first COVID-19 vaccine in March, Murray had a shingles infection and had to go to the prison clinic, she told Mississippi Today. Murray said when she asked the doctor about getting the second shot, the doctor responded by asking her which vaccine she received, which Murray said no one ever told her.
“I never got my second shot, and I have no idea what type I got,” Murray said.
The anonymous woman said she received the first COVID-19 shot in March, but she’s unsure if it was Moderna or Pfizer BioNTech. She said she was so busy thanking prison officials for administering the first vaccine that she forgot to ask which shot they were administering, and no one ever volunteered the information to them, she told Mississippi Today.
In mid-April, prison officials returned to administer the second dose of the COVID-19 vaccines, the anonymous woman said, but she, along with many other women, were called out of their zone for work that morning. When she returned to the zone in the evening, she said that’s when she learned that prison officials had administered the second dose of the COVID-19 vaccine.
“We walked the whole yard chasing the nurses around trying to get them to give us shots. We went to the warden’s office and everything,” the woman said. “We tried to do everything within our power to get these shots...They placated us telling us that we were going to get our shots later.”
Despite these efforts, the woman said she has yet to receive a second COVID-19 shot. She said she has hepatitis C and is fearful of prison officials and correctional officers who could be unknowingly spreading the delta variant to the incarcerated population. In the meantime, she said she’s been trying to socially distance from everyone.
“I don’t want to be around anybody coming in from the free world,” the woman said. “I think they should have vaccine and mask mandates put in place for nursing homes and prisons. I mean, because these people are coming in to see about us…They come to work sick and everything. Some of them refuse to get vaccinated.”
Honeycutt, the MDOC assistant deputy commissioner, told Mississippi Today that department staff “continue to be encouraged to be fully vaccinated for the safety of all.”
“I’ve been here a long time. I don’t want to die in here because of neglect. My life is at risk,” the anonymous woman said.
The storyline of the summer has been that House and Senate negotiators are close, closer — even very, very close — to having a deal on a medical marijuana program, for which Gov. Tate Reeves could call the Legislature into special session to pass.
But as summer slips toward fall, those mostly closed-door negotiations continue with scant details on the particulars or hang-ups, and… still no deal nor special session.
As the clock ticks, prospects for a special session before the January regular legislative session become less likely. And passage of a medical marijuana program during a busy regular session is far more politically arduous, perhaps even doubtful. Even current negotiations become endangered as time drags on — more chefs get in the kitchen, deals on particulars fall apart, the center cannot hold.
It would appear it’s time for lawmakers and Gov. Tate Reeves to fish or cut bait, as the saying goes, on a medical marijuana program to replace the one passed by voters but shot down by the state Supreme Court.
If negotiators are truly close on broad strokes, Reeves could call them in and let them get to haggling — if, as he and legislative leaders have said, they desire to uphold the will of the voters on this issue. Reeves could take a leadership role with the issue, help broker a deal or cajole lawmakers into ratifying a program. So far, he has only said publicly that he supports the will of the voters and would call a special session if lawmakers tell him they’ve agreed on particulars.
Reeves, who holds sole authority to call a special session, could try to get the ball rolling, or just sit back and point at the Legislature and say he can’t help it if lawmakers can’t get their act together.
Special sessions can provide hyper focus on a single issue, and they often allow the clunky-by-design Legislature to hunker down and pass things they otherwise couldn’t amid the usual political flotsam and jetsam of a regular session. A special session — especially one during or near football season, deer season and the holidays — puts pressure on lawmakers to get things done so they can return home. Also, the costs to taxpayers of a special session add up quickly at tens of thousands of dollars a day, applying more pressure to get things done quickly.
The Mississippi Legislature has otherwise been unable for years to pass a measure for the state to join dozens of others in legalizing medical marijuana, even as public outcry for it grew. That’s why the citizenry took matters in hand and legalized it last year, only to have the state Supreme Court come in and un-legalize it over what many considered a technicality.
Already, the extended negotiations on medical marijuana have seen one major eleventh-hour problem: State Agriculture Commissioner Andy Gipson recently announced he wants no part in oversight of the program. He’s now threatening to sue if lawmakers pass a law putting him in charge of regulating cultivation and processing of marijuana (despite this having been discussed for months). This has likely delayed the “very, very close” negotiations.
Under Initiative 65, passed by voters in November, the state would have had a medical marijuana program launched in July, and would have begun issuing licenses for people with qualifying illnesses to start using the drug by Aug. 15.
Some very ill people could benefit from this. Voters spoke on this issue. State leaders have vowed to uphold their voice, and vowed to do so in a timely fashion. The clock has been ticking. It’s time.
Mississippi Today journalists Adam Ganucheau, Bobby Harrison and Geoff Pender discuss where in the process lawmakers are on passing a medical marijuana program to replace the one struck down by the Mississippi Supreme Court in May. Officials had promised a marijuana special session in August. Where are they?
Adam Ganucheau: Welcome to The Other Side, Mississippi Today’s political podcast. I’m your host, Adam Ganucheau. The Other Side lets you hear directly from the most connected players and observers across the spectrum of politics in Mississippi. From breaking news to political strategy to interviews with candidates and elected officials, we’ll bring you facts, perspectives and context that helps you cut through the noise and understand all sides of the story.
Joining us today are my colleagues, Bobby Harrison and Geoff Pender. Hey y’all.
Bobby Harrison: Hey guys. How y’all doing?
Geoff Pender: Hey Adam and Bobby.
Adam Ganucheau: Well, I wanted to talk this week about something that is near and dear to all of us, at least our professional lives: medical marijuana. Just to kind of recap really quickly— as I’m going to do this, Bobby is cracking up at the joke I just made. I’m going to recap just very quickly where we’ve been and what we’re looking at now.
So back in November of 2020, Mississippi voters overwhelmingly passed initiative 65, which created a robust medical marijuana program. It’s a ballot initiative, so it wasn’t lawmakers who put it up for a vote. It was the citizens of Mississippi who did it themselves.
And they did that because lawmakers had sort of ignored this issue for years and years. About a week before that election, Madison Mayor Mary Hawkins Butler filed a lawsuit in state courts, challenging the constitutionality of the ballot initiative process that allowed the medical marijuana program to pass.
That of course worked its way through the court system, leading to a few months later in May of this year, the Mississippi Supreme Court struck down both the medical marijuana program and that entire ballot initiative process. There was obviously a ton of political backlash across the state of Mississippi, very intense. Legislative leaders and just kind of, you know, rank and file lawmakers suggested that they wanted to come into a special session to do two things: to first, pass a medical marijuana program and second, to fix the ballot initiative process that was ultimately effectively taken off the books by the state Supreme Court decision. We were told, I guess, that that Governor Tate Reeves was, he said himself that he was willing to call a special session. He has that sole authority to do that. He’s the only one who can call them into a special session.
He said he’d do it only if lawmakers came to an agreement ahead of time on medical marijuana. We were told by legislative leaders after that that there would be an agreement, that they were working on it, and several of them suggested that we would see that agreement sometime in August and they’d be ready to come into a special session in August.
Well, here we are mid-September. Geoff, I’ll pose the first question to you. Where the hell are we with medical marijuana?
Geoff Pender: The official answer you get is the same answer we’ve gotten I think since probably June-ish is that they’re close. They’re close to having an agreement. Now there’s a million moving parts to standing up a medical marijuana program and what little details coming out in the negotiations, you get close. Close may be a relative term, but by most reports, they’ve agreed on some of the broad strokes, but I think the longer this goes, the more of those details get brought in and get argued about.
He cited that, you know, it’s still federally illegal despite 38 states having either medical or some other form of legalized marijuana. And he said it’s still federally illegal, he’s not going to participate in it. And if the Legislature passes a law telling him to participate in it, he’ll sue, so. that’s a major issue I would imagine. You’re not hearing a whole lot out of the negotiators of what they’re going to do, but you know, that may have caused a little bit of going back to the main drawing board. You know, there’s been talk when they held hearings this summer, some states create a separate, you know, marijuana commission or whatever. And, you know, I suspect that’s more on the table now than maybe it was if Gipson is not going to participate. I’m sure they could try and force him to, but you know, if true to his word, he files litigation, I mean that can hold up this process for another year or two. Oh, it’s already been held up.
Adam Ganucheau: The Legislature doesn’t typically take kindly to an executive branch official trying to tell them what to do or what not to do. So, I mean, it’s the precedence there for them to sort of, you know, force his hand on it. That’s what they’re there for. They do that all the time.
Bobby Harrison: Am I the only person who sees irony in this, that Andy Gipson, Mr. States’ Rights, pro-gun, pro-10th Amendment, states’ rights, is saying that I’m going to follow the federal law, not the state law. I mean, to me, that’s just priceless within itself.
Geoff Pender: In the past when he was a law maker, especially, he wasn’t really fond on federal government, or as you said, he appeared to lean more towards states’ rights, so that is kind of interesting.
Adam Ganucheau: Well, you know, the sort of debate or question that we sort of had internally at Mississippi Today last week was at this point being mid-September, you know, probably need to give lawmakers at least a week or two heads up, so we’re looking at, at the very soonest, October special session.
Now at this point in the year, is it even worth doing it in a special session, or should you just wait until regular session in January of 22? Bobby, what do you think? I mean, what do you make of sort of the merits of doing it now versus, you know, 2022 regular session?
Bobby Harrison: I can see it both ways. I mean, first of all, whole consensus, I mean, you’re not going to call a special session until there’s consensus. I mean, right now there’s work to get a consensus between, I guess, Delbert Hosemann and Kevin Blackwell in the Senate and Representative Yancey and Philip Gunn in the House. Those are the people working to get a consensus. When they go in a special session, somebody wants to offer an amendment to change that consensus. They have every right to. So, the argument about a consensus is kinda misleading. I mean, but I mean, the reason you do it in a special session is to get it over with and get it done.
I lived through the 82-day tort reform special session. And what happens in the special session is there’s no deadlines, so you can go into a special session and just sort of sit there and stare at each other. I mean, the beauty of a regular session is there are deadlines. You have to get things done by certain deadlines or the bill dies, so that puts more of an onus on the Legislature to reach a consensus. But the reason I think it would be better to do in a special session, if that’s the way you want to go, there’s two reasons. First of all, I think— Geoff correct me if I’m wrong, but under the original initiative, the medical marijuana initiative had stood up in court.
There was supposed to be a program created I think in August.
Geoff Pender: No, programs stood up in July and should have been in operation issuing cards by August 15th.
Bobby Harrison: So that’s one reason to do a special session. The other reason to do it in a special session is when the Legislature does go in session January 2022, there’s going to be so many issues.
There’s going to be more issues facing this Legislature than perhaps any Legislature I can remember from redistricting to whether to reinstate the initiative process, maybe medical marijuana, issue of whether to cut and eliminate the income tax. It’s just going to be so many issues facing Legislature.
They can get one or two of those issues done in special session. That would be a bonus for legislators. And I guess the state too.
Adam Ganucheau: Yeah. That brings up another question, Bobby. I mean, as we’ve reported this out the last few weeks, specifically about medical marijuana, we’re talking about a special session for medical marijuana, but like I said at the very beginning of the episode when I was sort of recapping where we’ve been, early on shortly after that Supreme Court ruling, we were hearing talks from legislative leaders. Not everyone of course was on the same page, but even speaker Philip Gunn said this, that he wanted to come back into a special session to fix the ballot initiative. Because as of right now, there is no way for Mississippi voters to put an issue on the ballot in Mississippi. And that was one of those constitutional sort of rights granted to Mississippians for, you know, many decades, and that’s now gone. And so what is the status of that? I mean, have y’all heard anything about a special session for the ballot initiative fix?
Bobby Harrison: No. And if you recall Speaker Gunn, he talked about a special session for the ballot initiative. He didn’t mention medical marijuana when he first talked about a special session. He talked about the ballot initiative, but what’s interesting is there were so many major ballot initiatives that died when when the Supreme Court ruled.
Now, interestingly, there’s a ballot initiative on early voting, and those folks are just going ahead with gathering signatures with the hope that if they get the signatures, whenever the Legislature fixes it, they’ll do some type of retroactive thing and allow those signatures to count. So right now, there’s people presumably out in Mississippi gathering signatures for an initiative process that doesn’t work to allow Mississippians to vote in person early.
Geoff Pender: Yeah. There’s pretty much general consensus they’re going to wait on that. I don’t think there’s much strong talk at all about coming back in for that. Back to the medical marijuana though, I’d like to point out Bobby mentioned a couple of reasons why you might want to do a special session.
Another reason is for a singular issue such as this, and we’ve seen it with past issues, sometimes it’s far more easy to pass something such as a medical marijuana program in a special session in that you’ve got a hyper-focus on it. You don’t have the technical deadlines that you would in a special session, but you’ve got pressure.
You got deadlines. And with this being a singular issue, not the magnitude of tort reform, the governor can dissolve a special session if this goes off the rails and it were to look like they would be there 83 days. Certainly that would get dissolved. But I question—
Bobby Harrison: But that’s the only deadline. There’s no other deadlines.
Geoff Pender: No, but there’s pressure. They’re in during a time when they want to be going to football games, they want to be with their families working on their business. And I mean, we got holidays seasons coming up too, for that matter if this were pushed into October and November. But again some legislative leaders I’ve talked about wonder even if this were to go into the regular session, an extremely busy contentious regular session, whether they could even get a medical marijuana program passed period.
They’ve kicked this issue around at least since 2017 in regular sessions and gotten nowhere. You know, probably fending off having, you know, not having too many chefs in the kitchen, things like that. Now they missed the opportunity to do this quickly. I think if they would’ve jumped out there in June or July and had a special session on this, I think the opportunity would have been a little better to get it more quickly done.
But I don’t know if this goes into regular session if they would even be able to pass a medical marijuana program. Of course, whether they can pass one on a special session might be questionable too. But in the past we’ve seen sometimes that, you know, it’s easier for them if it’s a singular issue that they can focus on sometimes a special session is easier for that. And again, I understand the deadlines and the Legislature works on its deadlines, but I think the pressure, especially this late in the year, would be pretty intense on them to get something done and get out of there. So I still think, and some of the legislative leaders are saying right now that, you know, they still want to have a special session on this as opposed to pushing it back into the regular one.
Adam Ganucheau: I also think a good bit about the sort of politics of the relationship between the legislative leadership and Governor Reeves. Governor Reeves has the sole authority to call them into special session. I mean, they can’t do this unless he calls him in and as you just said, Geoff, the, the legislative leaders, Delbert Hosemann and Philip Gunn, they have clashed pretty, pretty hard, pretty directly with Governor Reeves just over the first two years of his term. And you know, I have to kind of wonder what exactly Governor Reeves’ calculus is in deciding at this point whether or not to call them back into Jackson, what that means for him politically.
This really surprised me. In the 2020 regular legislative session, I say regular because that’s the official term, but it was anything but regular. It was what we think the longest regular session in state history because of the coronavirus and lawmakers, there were outbreaks. They had to kind of take breaks to avoid, you know, the spread of the virus at the Capitol.
And what legislative leaders decided to do— and keep in mind, this was the first year of the term as Reeves as governor and Hosemann as lieutenant governor, of course the third term for Speaker Gunn. But they gave themselves the authority to extend the session as long as they wanted to.
So they kept kind of extending the end date on the legislative session. And a lot of people, myself included, kind of thought that that might become the norm moving forward, that they would give themselves that power every single year. They didn’t do it in 2021, and I’m wondering if maybe they regret not doing it for this reason or others because now they’re completely relying on Governor Reeves to call them back to Jackson to fix this issue that a lot of Mississippians have zoned in on and if they don’t get it right they could all suffer politically.
Bobby Harrison: Yeah, I thought the same thing you did, Adam. I didn’t think about it until 2020, but then I started thinking about it. If I was a legislator, I would always leave myself the option to come back. I mean, there was the longest session in history. I think you’re right about that, but it’s important to note they weren’t there in Jackson, the entire time. They just had the authority to come back because they had extended the session on paper, as they say.
Yeah, I thought they would do that again in 2021. And in reality, Philip Gunn wanted to, and I suspect Lieutenant Governor Hosemann did too, but I think the issue was that Hosemann over in the Senate could not get the two-thirds vote to do that, to keep them in session.
Adam Ganucheau: That was effectively stripping the governor of one of his powers, I mean, constitutional powers and calling a special session. That definitely could have changed the landscape of Mississippi politics and certainly the relationship between the legislative and executive branches. Well, do y’all have any guesses on when this might happen? I mean, you know, putting you on the spot here, but do you think we’re going to see a special session, or do you think it’s just going to hold until 2022?
Geoff Pender: I think we’re going to see, at the least, lawmakers soon going to the governor. We’re talking within a week or two and saying, “We’ve agreed on everything we can. Call us back in.” You know, Reeves is in a position though. He could politically not agree that they’re close enough or something like that. And you know, it’s not a given that he’ll call them in unless they can certify that they’re that close in agreement. But I mean, if they’re going to do this in special session, they’ve got to move soon. You know certainly there’s no point in, you know, a December special session. That would create a lot of fear and loathing with everyone. So, I still kind of think we will.
Bobby Harrison: Yeah, I think that if Reeves has no choice, I think if they say they reached an agreement, he said he’d call a special session. And I think it’d be bad for him politically to go back on his commitment.
Geoff Pender: One thing, I mean, with special sessions past when there was something like this, Reeves has said he supports the will of the voters. Well, he doesn’t have to just sit back, you know, and wait for the Legislature to give him the go ahead.
I mean, he could be more involved in the negotiation, taking a leadership role, urging them, cajoling them, whatever. But I haven’t seen that with this issue. I think his office has been involved some in the negotiation and keeping tabs, but certainly this isn’t an issue that he’s just, you know, championed and been out with his megaphone or anything like that.
So you know at this point, it’s still in the Legislature’s court.
Adam Ganucheau: Sure. Well, really interesting perspectives as always. And thank y’all for staying on top of this. I can’t help myself. I just have to circle back one more time to Andy Gipson. And I just think that, you know, I don’t know what exactly his calculus was in sort of publicly saying what he said about that, but my guess is that lawmakers don’t care too much about what Andy Gipson thinks at the Department of Agriculture. So we’ll see what they come up with, but I would bet some money on the fact that they’re gonna not take his perspective into account.
Geoff Pender: I don’t know. Andy’s against overseeing growing of the devil’s lettuce. Some farmers might not be real happy with that.
Adam Ganucheau: At least for his perspective, we always know he’s at least against wild hogs, so shoot a bunch of hogs and keep that under control. Maybe that’ll be good enough, but good luck to him. If lawmakers pass a bill here on medical marijuana that that includes his agency in some way, good luck to him politically if he wants to oppose that after they pass it. So that’s all I’m saying.
Bobby Harrison: I think Geoff’s right though. It could be an interesting court case of federal law versus state law. And I think the federal government would come in and say, “We don’t care.”
Geoff Pender: That is what they’ve essentially done, but marijuana is still federally illegal. Gipson has a legal point there.
Adam Ganucheau: Andy Gipson, the defender of federalism. Alright, y’all. Well, thanks again. Thanks for being here and thanks for helping us break it down.
Bobby Harrison: Enjoyed it.
Geoff Pender: Thanks.
Adam Ganucheau: As we cover the biggest political stories in this state, you don’t want to miss an episode of The Other Side. We’ll bring you more reporting from every corner of the state, sharing the voices of Mississippians and how they’re impacted by the news. So, what do we need from you, the listener? We need your feedback and support.
If you listen to the podcast on a player like iTunes or Stitcher, please subscribe to the show and leave us a review. We also have an email in which you can share your feedback. That address is Podcast@MississippiToday.org. Y’all can also reach out to me or any of my colleagues through social media or email. And as always thank you for your feedback and support.
Subscribe to our weekly podcast on your favorite podcast app or stream episodes online at MississippiToday.org/the-other-side. For the Mississippi Today team, I’m Adam Ganucheau. The Other Side is produced by Mississippi Today and engineered by Blue Sky Studios. We hope you’ll join us for our next episode.
South Carolina and Mississippi State players helped hold an American flag that stretched from sideline to sideline on Sept. 20, 2001, at Scott Field in the first major athletic event that followed the tragedies of 9/11. (MSU athletics)
We have observed, soberly, the 20-year anniversary of 9/11, which means we are also coming up on the anniversary of the first big sporting event played after 9/11, which was on Sept. 20, 2001, a Thursday night in Starkville.
Rick Cleveland
South Carolina vs. Mississippi State.
Remember?
If you were there, no way you have forgotten. There’s a good chance you have forgotten the score. You may have even forgotten that Lou Holtz was the Gamecocks coach. But you can’t have forgotten the eerie feeling of approaching and entering Scott Field that evening with all that security not knowing what to expect. You can’t have forgotten the amazing display of patriotism that ruled the night, or the South Carolina and Mississippi State players, who marched onto the field and held up a gigantic American flag in pre-game ceremonies.
So much I remember, including walking toward the stadium through the tailgating tents and fans and seeing far more red, white and blue than maroon and white. And seeing so many homemade signs like the one that said: “Go to Hell Ole Miss,” only with the Ole Miss crossed out and Bin Laden inserted. And seeing firefighters at each gate, holding out boots to collect money for a disaster relief fund for the families of New York City firefighters.
Larry Tempelton
Larry Templeton, then Mississippi State athletic director, surely remembers the call he received from then-SEC Commissioner Roy Kramer on Sunday afternoon just four days before the game. You must remember, all college and NFL football games had been postponed or canceled that weekend.
“The commissioner said he had just gotten off the phone with the White House, which got my attention,” Templeton says. “And then he said, ‘The White House wants y’all to play that game Thursday night. Can you get it ready?’”
Templeton says he replied, “We’ll be ready. Can you get South Carolina here?”
Kramer said he would.
It wasn’t easy. None of it was. For instance, South Carolina was supposed to fly to Mississippi the night before the game. That didn’t happen. Not enough crew could be found for the hastily arranged charter flight. Instead, the Gamecocks flew in on game day.
From Templeton’s standpoint, security was the paramount issue. You must remember, the image of the two jets flying into the World Trade Center — and a third flying into the Pentagon — were fresh on everyone’s minds. There were reports of that al-Queda had plans for more attacks in the days that followed. Starkville might not seem a likely target now, but there were going to be 43,000 people gathered in one place for a nationally televised event.
Says Templeton, “We weren’t taking anything for granted.”
Templeton talked to then-Gov. Ronnie Musgrove, who agreed, Templeton says, “to make the Mississippi Highway Patrol available to do whatever it took to make it as safe as possible.”
The MHP enlisted the help of the FBI. The Columbus Air Force base provided bomb-sniffing dogs, which roamed every nook and cranny of Scott Field in the three days leading up to the game and on game day. Among the scores of law officers patrolling the stadium and the surrounding area were FBI agents.
Because plans called for metal detectors to be employed at every gate, State fans were told to leave their cowbells at home. Says Templeton, proudly, “Most of them brought American flags instead.”
On Sept. 20, 2001, most Mississippi State fans wore red white and blue instead of maroon and white. (MSU athletics)
Among Templeton’s chief concerns was this: “I just didn’t know if our fans would show up. In the days leading up to the game, ESPN was promoting the broadcast seems like every five minutes. We knew there would be millions of viewers. I didn’t want them to see an empty stadium. We just didn’t know if our people would be comfortable enough to come…”
The ESPN audience saw a full house — or nearly so. They also witnessed a memorable show of patriotism, highlighted by the two opposing teams marching onto the field to help hold the American flag, which stretched from sideline to sideline. State quarterback Wayne Madkin, who led the State players onto the field, remembers that Bulldog players were not told of the script until just before they left the locker room.
“We didn’t know what was going to happen, we had no idea,” says Madkin, who now works for Entergy. “Our coaches had done a really good job of keeping our focus on the game. I mean, there were so many distractions. We were trying to get ready to play a football game, while wondering, ‘Is my family going to be OK? Is there going to be another attack?’ There was so much on our minds back then. And then we walked out on the field, saw the crowd and all those American flags and all the cameras. And that’s when it hit me that this was way bigger than a football game.”
And, 20 years later?
“I think we can take some pride in that we were able to be a small part of the healing of the nation,” Madkin says. “There was such a feeling of patriotism that night.”
They did play football that night, and South Carolina won a hard-fought 16-14 game. Even then, the score seemed almost insignificant.
Says Templeton, “I can hardly remember anything about the game. What I remember is that we felt like we were putting on a show for America that night. And I remember Commissioner Kramer shaking my hand and saying we pulled it off.”
