OurTupelo

The post Marshall Ramsey: The Lifeguard appeared first on Mississippi Today.

We want to know more about educators’ experiences with helping students get to graduation. Please take a moment to fill out the brief survey below.

Your name or any identifying information you submit will not be used without your consent.

The post Reader survey: Dropout prevention in schools appeared first on Mississippi Today.

The full U.S. 5^th Circuit Court of Appeals will hear oral arguments Wednesday morning from its federal courthouse in New Orleans on whether Mississippi’s lifetime ban on voting for people convicted of certain felonies is constitutional.

A ruling by the federal panel overturning the Jim Crow-era provisions of the state Constitution could restore the voting rights to tens of thousands of Mississippians “who’ve been locked out of the democratic process for life even after completing their criminal sentences and returning to their communities,” said Kevin Pallasch of the Southern Poverty Law Center.

Both the SPLC and the Mississippi Center for Justice filed separate lawsuits challenging Mississippi’s felony voting restrictions, which were placed in the state’s 1890s’ Constitution to try to disenfranchise African Americans, writers of the Constitution said at the time.

Earlier this year a three judge panel of the 5^th Circuit rejected the arguments of the consolidated lawsuits against the state. But the case was revived when the full panel agreed to hear it.

In the 1890s, the Mississippi Supreme Court said the disfranchisement of felons was placed in the Constitution “to obstruct the exercise of the franchise by the negro race” by targeting “the offenses to which its weaker members were prone.” Rob McDuff, an attorney with the Center for Justice, said the provision’s intent was the same as the poll tax, the literacy test and other Jim Crow-era provisions that sought to prevent African Americans from voting.

Those crimes placed in the Constitution where conviction would cost a person the right to vote were bribery, theft, arson, obtaining money or goods under false pretense, perjury, forgery, embezzlement, bigamy and burglary. Those were crimes that the 1890 framers believed African Americans were more likely to commit.

Under the original language of the Constitution, a person could be convicted of cattle rustling and lose the right to vote, but those convicted of murder or rape and still be able to vote — even while incarcerated.

In 1968, the crimes of murder and rape were added as disenfranchising crimes. But even today, a person could be convicted of writing a bad check and lose the right to vote, but be a major drug kingpin locked up in prison and still vote. The lawsuit does not seek to overturn the voting ban for those convicted of murder or rape.

Under the Mississippi Constitution, a person who loses his voting rights because of a felony conviction cannot have them restored without a two-thirds vote of both chambers of the Mississippi Legislature or by a gubernatorial pardon. The Legislature has been reluctant to restore those rights.

It is not clear when the full panel will rule after the oral arguments.

The case against the state will be argued by former U.S. Solicitor General Donald B. Verrilli.

The post 5th Circuit to hear arguments on state’s felony voting ban appeared first on Mississippi Today.

Democrats in the U.S. Congress are considering a way to offer health care insurance for low income Mississippians who have been denied coverage because of the refusal of the state’s political leadership to expand Medicaid.

The proposal would provide health care coverage to people who are below the federal poverty level (an individual making $12,880 per year or less) in the 12 primarily Southern states — including Mississippi — that have not expanded Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act.

Two million Americans could access health care coverage through the plan, with the bulk of those being in Texas, Florida, Georgia and North Carolina, according to an analysis by Judith Solomon, a health policy analyst with the Washington-based Center for Budget and Policy Priorities.

In Mississippi, studies have estimated that between 200,000 and 300,000 primarily working Mississippians could qualify for coverage if the state would expand Medicaid.

“The problem is the 12 states that refuse to expand despite overwhelming evidence of the benefits of expansion of coverage to people, state budgets and health care providers,” Solomon said. “Given it’s been seven years since expansion took effect and huge financial incentives in the American Rescue Plan Act haven’t moved any states into the expansion column, this is the only way to get coverage to those who have been left out.”

The congressional proposal is being considered as part of the budget reconciliation bill that Congress is currently negotiating. The initial budget plan was $3.5 trillion, which was met with intense pushback by Republicans and moderate Democrats.

The proposal is tied up in political negotiations, and it’s possible it will not make the final bill. Southern Democrats, in particular, are lobbying their party’s leadership for the workaround to Medicaid expansion in the 12 non-expansion states. But some Democrats in states that have already expanded Medicaid are arguing that if concessions must be made in the final budget bill, they would prefer to focus on other aspects of the sweeping bill — namely providing free dental, vision and hearing coverage to seniors across income levels.

Health care is a chief policy platform of Democrats across the nation, and considering how best to move forward on providing coverage to more Americans is at the forefront of the debate. But because most of the 12 states are controlled by Republicans, and Democrats typically lose elections in those states, there is tension within the party ranks about whether the Medicaid expansion workaround is politically advantageous.

If Mississippi were to expand Medicaid under current law, the federal government would pay 90% of the health care costs with the state paying the remainder. Gov. Tate Reeves, House Speaker Philip Gunn and others have argued Mississippi cannot afford the costs of expanding Medicaid, though multiple studies — including one last week from the Mississippi state economist — have found that the expansion with the infusion of billions of dollars in federal funds would actually increase state revenue collections.

READ MORE: State economist refutes politicians’ claim that Mississippi cannot afford Medicaid expansion

Under the proposal being considered by federal lawmakers, Mississippi would not be required to provide any matching funds.

“I imagine if there was any program like that, the governor and attorney general (Lynn Fitch) would sue to try to keep us from getting the money,” surmised Senate Public Health Committee Chair Hob Bryan, D-Amory, who has been a proponent of Medicaid expansion.

The federal American Rescue Plan, passed earlier this year as a response to the COVID-19 pandemic, provides additional incentive for Mississippi to expand Medicaid, offering more than $600 million over a two-year period. The other non-expansion states received similar incentives as part of the American Rescue Plan. Presumably, because the 12 states refused to take advantage of those incentives, congressional leadership is developing the workaround to provide coverages to the uninsured in those states.

As the proposal is currently written, people who earn under the federal poverty line could obtain insurance on the Healthcare Marketplace. People, based on their income level, receive federal subsides to help pay for their marketplace policies.

Under current law, people who earn below the federal poverty level do not qualify for marketplace policies.

Also under the proposal, those falling below the federal poverty level could obtain the insurance on the marketplace at no cost to them. And then in 2025, the people would transition to a Medicaid program run solely by the federal government.

If passed, states currently in the Medicaid expansion program could opt out of their current program and rely on the solely federal program, but they would have to provide a payment to the federal government.

“I hope the expansion states that have embraced expansion and seen its benefits will understand that this is critical to do,” Solomon said.

READ MORE: Mississippi chamber of commerce mulling Medicaid expansion

The post Congress considers Medicaid expansion workaround to provide health care to poor Mississippians appeared first on Mississippi Today.

When I watched the governor on with Jake Tapper, it reminded me of this classic scene from Animal House.

The post Marshall Ramsey: All’s Well! appeared first on Mississippi Today.

The Board of Trustees of the Institutions of Higher Learning voted last week to ban public universities from requiring the COVID-19 vaccine for students, faculty and staff. The move appears to make it the first higher education governing board in the country to do so.

Mississippi’s eight public universities are now “prohibited by the Board from implementing a COVID-19 vaccine mandate as a condition of employment or enrollment except for clinical settings,” Caron Blanton, IHL’s spokesperson, wrote in an email Friday. 

The vote, held without notice at the boards’ annual retreat two-and-a-half hours from Jackson, came as a surprise to many faculty and staff. 

For months, faculty urged Mississippi universities to join the hundreds of other colleges across the country that have mandated the COVID vaccine. But administrators, namely those at Mississippi State University and University of Mississippi, insisted they did not have that authority even though IHL said they did. In August, Blanton told Mississippi Today that IHL’s immunization policy “represents the minimum requirements that must be enforced by the universities. Additional requirements are not prohibited.” 

READ MORE: Fact-check: Mississippi universities say they can’t require the COVID vaccine. IHL says they can.

That’s no longer the case with this new vote, which appears to be the first time a higher ed board has moved to ban a COVID vaccine mandate. 

“The decision by the Mississippi Board of Trustees is a slap in the face to all faculty and students calling for basic public health protections to ensure safe learning environments in their classrooms and on campus,” Irene Mulvey, president of the American Association of University Professors, told Mississippi Today in a statement.

University of Mississippi Medical Center announced last month it will require all students and employees to be fully vaccinated by Nov. 1.

UMMC spokesperson Patrice Guilfoyle told Mississippi Today on Monday that “it is our understanding what when the IHL board originally voted, they excluded UMMC, and because we are a clinical sciences campus, it does not impact our policy. It is our understanding that our campus is part of the clinical settings.”

In late August, as the delta variant surged across Mississippi, the IHL board called a special meeting to debate whether or not to require the vaccine. At that meeting, held on Aug. 27, the board voted over the objections of the two physician board members not to require the vaccine. 

After 19 minutes of discussion, Trustee Chip Morgan, a real estate lawyer, made a motion for the board to vote on. 

“I will leave it to the staff to provide the exact language,” Morgan said, “but I’d like for us to point out our support for the vaccine, and that it is by far and away the best protection we have for our schools.

“And with the caveat of the medical center, and I presume … some of the nursing programs are gonna have clinical interaction,” he continued, “but other than that, I think we ought to say at this time, it’s our view that we would not impose any requirement on the universities to mandate vaccination.”

At a faculty senate meeting at MSU two weeks later, David Shaw, the provost, fielded repeated questions from professors about whether IHL’s vote left the door open for individual universities to require the COVID vaccine. To their surprise, Shaw pointed to the August vote as proof of why the university could not mandate the vaccine. 

The overwhelming vote by the governing board against vaccine mandates, Shaw said, amounted to a “very clear directive” to universities.

This left the faculty confused  — the vote had not seemed to change IHL’s stance on whether individual universities could impose vaccine mandates on their own.

“Could you please get the legal counsel of either IHL or the university to explain to us why we need authority from IHL in order to institute this,” one faculty member asked Shaw at the meeting. 

Confusion deepened last week when the provost emailed MSU faculty with an update on IHL policy.

In the email, Shaw told faculty the minutes of the August IHL meeting showed the board had passed a motion stating that “institutions are directed to refrain from mandating the COVID-19 vaccination as a condition of enrollment or employment.”

That was different from what a recording of the meeting showed IHL had voted on.

By Friday morning, though, IHL took a new vote to confirm the policy as Shaw’s email described it. 

A recording of that vote and any discussion is not available because the vote took place during the board’s annual retreat, which this year was held in West Point in a room that “did not have the technical capabilities for webcasting,” Blanton told Mississippi Today. 

Across the country, a handful of state legislatures and governors have prohibited public entities from requiring the vaccine. Seven states, for example, have banned vaccine requirements for state workers, according to the National Academy for State Health Policy. But the IHL appears to be the first higher ed board to institute a state-wide ban. 

“The Board acknowledges that vaccinations are the safe and effective way to end the pandemic but will not institute a vaccine mandate,” Mulvey said. “Instead, they are mandating that faculty put their health at risk in order to do their jobs. This is malpractice in board leadership that will lead to additional serious illness and death.”

Editor’s note: This story was updated after publication to include a quote from the University of Mississippi Medical Center.

The post ‘A slap in the face’: In surprise vote, IHL board bans COVID-19 vaccine mandates appeared first on Mississippi Today.

The U.S. Supreme Court will hear oral arguments for Mississippi’s 15-week abortion ban on Dec. 1, providing what many believe could be the first opportunity for the conservative majority to widely limit access to abortion in America.

On Monday the court released its schedule for its October term, and will hear oral arguments for Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization in December. The case focuses on Mississippi’s 15-week abortion ban, which the Mississippi Legislature passed in 2018 and was immediately blocked by lower federal courts.

The case challenges Roe v. Wade, the landmark 1973 U.S. Supreme Court decision that affirmed pregnant people have a constitutional right to receive an abortion. Mississippi’s case is a testing ground, the first reproductive rights case to be argued before the Supreme Court since Justice Amy Coney Barrett was confirmed in 2020.

The case before the court is not the most restrictive ban passed in Mississippi. In 2019 the state Legislature passed a fetal heartbeat ban which prohibited abortion after six weeks, but it was struck down in an appelate court. The 15-week ban passed in 2018. State law currently prohibits abortions after 20 weeks in Mississippi, though the sole provider in the state only performs them up to 16 weeks.

Last month the Supreme Court allowed a Texas law to go into effect that prohibits abortions after six weeks of pregnancy.

READ MORE: Mississippi pro-choice activists prepare for an America without Roe v. Wade

Oral arguments will be heard in person, but the courtroom will not be open to the public. The court said earlier this month that a live feed will be made available.

The post U.S. Supreme Court schedules oral arguments for Mississippi abortion ban appeared first on Mississippi Today.

When repeatedly asked on national television why Mississippi led the nation in COVID-19 deaths per capita, Gov. Tate Reeves downplayed the statistic and refused to discuss what’s being done to address it, instead lashing out at Democratic President Joe Biden.

Reeves appeared Sunday on CNN’s State of the Union with Jake Tapper to discuss his response to the pandemic, particularly his opposition to Biden’s proposed vaccine mandate. 

Reeves has previously stated that he plans to sue the federal government once the particulars of the vaccine mandate are released, a claim he reasserted during his Sunday appearance. 

“If this president has the ability to mandate vaccines, what powers do we not grant this president? What does he not have the ability to do?….That’s not something that I’m willing to stand by and allow him to do. Obviously we have made it very clear that we are prepared to sue once we actually see the rule.” 

Tapper repeatedly pressed Reeves on the high COVID death rate per capita in Mississippi, which last week rose to first in the nation, asking what steps Reeves was taking to address this. 

“If Mississippi were its own country, you would be second in the world, only to Peru, in terms of deaths per capita,” Tapper said. “That’s a horrible, horrible, heartbreaking statistic. So, with all due respect, governor, your way is failing. Are you going to try to change anything to change this horrible statistic from what you’re doing already?”

Reeves did not directly answer the question and instead attempted to contextualize the statistic, pointing out that deaths are a lagging indicator and that case counts have fallen and total vaccinations have increased in Mississippi.

While daily death totals do often lag behind case counts and positivity rates in terms of measuring the prevalence of the virus at any given moment, Tapper was referencing the total number of deaths in Mississippi since the pandemic began — currently 9,270, according to the Mississippi Department of Health. It is this number, the total number of deaths since the start of the pandemic, for which Mississippi now leads the nation on a per capita basis. 

Mississippi taking the top spot was the direct result of a disastrous August that pushed its health care system to the brink of collapse. The state’s caseload and hospitalization rates are still quite high, but have decreased significantly from the peaks seen in August. Over the past two weeks, new infections have decreased by 32% and hospitalizations have decreased by 23%. 

While the number of vaccines administered each week did increase during the height of the delta variant’s presence in Mississippi, that number is currently trending downward. Currently, 42% of Mississippians are fully vaccinated against COVID-19. 

In the CNN interview, Reeves also repeatedly attempted to direct focus on other states, saying that he expected total deaths per capita to increase in other states that are currently experiencing a surge in cases and implying that Mississippi may not hold the top spot for long in terms of per capita deaths. 

Tapper continued to ask Reeves about what changes he was making in Mississippi, and Reeves responded by repeating changes in virus caseload and vaccination rates in Mississippi. During the 11-minute interview, Reeves never discussed any changes that he had made in his decision-making as the leader of the pandemic response efforts.

WATCH: The full Sept. 19 CNN interview with Gov. Tate Reeves

The post Gov. Reeves downplays Mississippi’s highest-in-nation COVID death rate appeared first on Mississippi Today.

A supervisor called Darlene Smith at her work-from-home office one afternoon this summer, wondering why she’d taken her 30-minute lunch break 30 minutes early.

She was changing her 6-month-old’s diaper and tending to her rambunctious 6-year-old.

“I thought I was about to lose my job,” Smith said. 

Smith had been receiving child care assistance through the Mississippi Department of Human Services’ Child Care Payment Program for the last four years so she could hold a job.

In June, just a few months after her maternity leave ended, the agency put Smith through “redetermination” — essentially making her reapply for the program. It found her ineligible and abruptly ended her benefits.

Smith is one of thousands of Mississippi parents, according to a survey of child care centers, who have lost their child care certificate in recent months during the COVID-19 pandemic, even while the state hoards over half-a-billion in unspent federal child care dollars. 

Typically, parents must prove they worked at least 25 hours every week in order to remain eligible for the assistance.

At her job as a customer service representative for an insurance company, where she answers calls and handles claims, Smith was working between 20 and 24 hours.

After Smith lost the voucher, she had to pull her daughter out of daycare, where the little girl was receiving uninterrupted attention. When they’re at home, Serenity, the 6-year-old, likes to rile up baby Martez, causing a squealing commotion. 

“I don’t have time to see what’s going on ‘cause I’m on the phone,” Smith said. “You gotta answer all your calls. You’ll get in trouble if you don’t answer your calls.”

Mississippi had the option to suspend the certificate program’s regular rules, including redetermination, during the ongoing health and economic crisis. 

But the state chose not to, straining both low-income households and the child care centers whose budgets rely on the government subsidy. 

“We’ve lost a lot of children because of redetermination,” said Patricia Young, owner of School of Champions Development & Learning Academy in Itta Bena. “Parents have not had that opportunity or chance to get back to work, to even look for a job. That’s really been hard.”

Mississippi Low Income Child Care Initiative, which conducted the recent survey, estimates that between 3,600 and 4,100 parents lost their assistance during the recent redetermination process, which could translate to up to 7,300 children now lacking childcare.

As Mississippi’s welfare department has kicked parents off the child care voucher, Young said she’s watched her center’s revenue decrease and her blood pressure skyrocket.

At the same time, she’s taken on more responsibility because kids who used to attend her center part-time are there all day conducting virtual learning as the public schools navigate COVID-19.

“They’re opening and closing and opening and closing because of the virus,” Young said.

In Itta Bena, nearly half the residents live in poverty and the median household income is just over $17,000, so Young’s center relies on the government subsidy to stay in business.

“The (parents) I have are working at factories or food plants or at McDonalds. They cannot afford to pay for child care,” Young said. “That’s the purpose that I was thinking the certificate program was for, to help those parents who cannot otherwise afford child care.”

Mississippi has some of the least expensive child care costs in the nation, meaning providers are paid less here, leading to lower pay for child care workers and limited resources for early childhood development inside the centers.

Even so, economic conditions in Mississippi mean that a typical family still cannot afford care, according to U.S. Department of Health and Human Services standards, and must spend 22% of its income on child care.

The child care voucher, a critical work support for low-income families, is not extra cash in a parent’s pocket, but ensures kids have a safe place to go with supervision and socialization while they are at work.

The child care division’s COVID-19 emergency policy, filed in April of 2020, suspended work requirements for the child care program. It stated that once the governor determined child care was no longer in an emergency condition, clients would be given a 60 day period to begin searching for a job or enroll in school in order to remain eligible for the benefit. 

But providers told Mississippi Today that the department offered them no warning.

“The child care providers had no clue. They woke up one morning, checked their email and had termination, termination, termination, termination, termination,” said Debbie Ellis, owner of child care center The Learning Tree in Greenwood. “… I cannot imagine the benefit to the state.”

Mississippi Department of Human Services did not respond to Mississippi Today’s requests for interviews or comment for this story, which began in August, by the time of publication. The agency plans to host a virtual public hearing to gather comments about policies within the Child Care Payment Program tomorrow, September 21st, at 11 a.m.

The American Rescue Plan Act, enacted in March, provided a $15 billion supplement to the annual Child Care and Development Fund, which mainly funds the voucher program, and an additional $24 billion in child care stabilization grants for struggling providers. Mississippi received $200 million and $319 million, respectively, which it has yet to push out. 

Carol Burnett, director of the Mississippi Low-Income Child Care Initiative, said the department has expressed reluctance to use the money to offer more vouchers because since the money is not permanent, parents may lose the benefit when the funding dries up.

“You don’t want to build up all this capacity and then not be able to sustain it,” Chad Allgood, director of MDHS’s Division of Early Childhood Care and Development, told PBS NewsHour during its series on child care that aired in July.

Burnett doesn’t buy it: “God forbid we serve another kid this year that we can’t serve four years from now when the money runs out,” she said.

The voucher has historically served just a fraction of the population, and Burnett estimates the program currently reaches roughly 25% of low-income children who need care. In the past, the state has chalked up the low number to federal funding shortfalls. Now, Burnett argues, the state has a chance to make a difference.

At the Sept. 9 meeting of the State Early Childhood Advisory Council, the group Gov. Tate Reeves appointed to advise him on early childhood education and child care, Allgood downplayed the magnitude of the department’s recent cash infusion.

“I think that will help somewhat, but it’s not the end-all answer. I think there’s still an issue of the expense of child care,” Allgood said. “And we do have subsidy assistance, but frankly, the normal funding that we get and even the additional money that we got to help provide subsidy, it’s not enough. It’s just not enough.”

He added: “We want to serve every family, you know, that’s eligible and that has a need, but the federal funding alone is not going to get it, not going to get us there.”

Providers complain that Allgood and DHS leadership are dragging their feet.

“Child care providers are closing their doors. Child care providers are being forced into quarantine without personal protective equipment, with over a half billion dollars sitting at DHS to stabilize existing businesses,” Ellis said.

Ellis said she expected more from the department and the child care division’s relatively new leadership, especially during the pandemic and unstable economy.

“But many are not surprised by the decisions that were made for redetermination,” Ellis said.

“Old school.”

At the recent State Early Childhood Advisory Council meeting, Allgood led a broad discussion about the status of early childhood in Mississippi.

“A very, very important question is, when we look at the access to these services, the experiences that the children and families are having as they’re accessing the services and the outcomes that are being provided through these services: Are they equitable?” Allgood said. “I think that’s going to be key. And I think ensuring equity across the board is something that we definitely need to make sure that we’re addressing within our early childhood system as a whole.”

The primary responsibility of Allgood’s division is to administer the federal Child Care Development Fund, the annual fund that supplies child care vouchers to low-income parents.

But in the nearly two-and-a-half hour meeting, Allgood made little mention of the state’s voucher program or how they planned to spend more than $500 million in extra child care dollars, nor did they discuss expanding the assistance to needy families.

Allgood did say the department plans to start accepting applications from child care centers for $319 million in direct stabilization grants on Oct. 1. That money goes directly to the providers. He did not provide any other specifics.

“We are working very diligently to try to get those out,” Allgood said. “What we have run up against is the federal government, they issued the money, but then the guidance came later. And so we have had to sort of, you know, plan as we go and we’ve asked questions and, you know, we’re still getting guidance from the feds.”

“Every single penny of that money will go directly to child care,” he added.

At least fourteen states have already opened stabilization grant applications according to the federal government and some, such as Illinois, began sending payments to providers as early as May.

“We’re way behind the implementation timeline,” said Burnett, who served as the state’s administrator of the Child Care Development Fund in the early 2000s.

Allgood said one hold up is that the department wants to train providers on how to track their spending.

“We, in turn, have to monitor child care providers on the use of the funding. If there’s a misuse of funding, inadvertently even, we do not want to have to go and recoup that money a year from now, that would be devastating,” Allgood said.

Providers have not received any information about what the stabilization grants to providers will look like — how much money they will be (Allgood called them “sizable”) or how they may be spent.

Burnett said she also worries about the scope of the grants.

“I think Mississippi is going to be really conservative in what — out of all the options that states can pick — Mississippi is going to choose,” Burnett said.

“I suspect we’re going to prioritize stuff over staff,” Burnett explained. “Bottles of bleach instead of wage stipends for workers.”

The department also hasn’t addressed the barriers parents face, such as the work requirement, in applying for child care assistance. Eight-in-10 child care centers say they serve parents who are eligible for the voucher but are unable to get approved, according to the recent survey. 

Ellis said parents can be denied or terminated from the program for as little as having an expired driver’s license.

Another hurdle to receiving the voucher is the state’s requirement that low-income parents, usually single moms, use state-contracted attorneys to go after their child’s father in court for child support money.

Often, family advocates say, it’s not that a mother wants to shirk child support, but that she has her own working arrangement with the father and wants to avoid making waves.

Kassandra Fisher, owner of Agape Love Learning Center in Greenwood, said that the requirement can cause problems even for parents who are already participating in the child support program. She said she’s seen parents lose their voucher simply for failing to provide the proper proof.

“We don’t have an office for child support in Greenwood, it’s in Grenada. So that’s another problem for parents,” Fisher said. “If I’m working that Monday and I can’t afford to take off, trying to make sure I got my (25) hours and you’re telling me I gotta meet the child support requirements. I got to try to get to Grenada because I might call the phone up, and it’s just so many people calling on the phone, I might not reach nobody. See, that what’s going on.”

“It’s kind of hard to tell people that are struggling to work to take off to go try to get a child support letter if they can’t get nobody on the phone,” Fisher said.

Eight-in-10 surveyed providers say the child support requirement discourages parents from applying, and 73% say it results in denials for their clients — both of which translate to an estimated 9,700 to 11,100 children in centers who are unable to access the voucher because of the state’s demand.

Dana Kidd, former deputy administrator of economic assistance for Mississippi’s welfare agency, admitted to Mississippi Today in 2018 that the requirement put mothers in a difficult position, “but that’s our state policy and federal regulations.”

State statute does not mandate that the department impose child support requirements on child care recipients, according to legal experts hired by Mississippi Low Income Child Care Initiative. 

But a few months ago, when Burnett visited Mississippi Department of Human Services Director Bob Anderson to discuss eliminating the extra burden, Burnett said Anderson denied that the requirement was a deterrent to any parents in need of the voucher.

“They’ve quit arguing now that they’re mandated by state law,” Burnett said. “Now they’re saying it’s just not a problem.”

The state doesn’t require recipients of other types of government aid — the kind that often benefits middle class or wealthier families — to enter the state’s child support system to qualify. The state does not, for instance, impose this requirement on families receiving state-funded college scholarships or the business executives who secure millions in incentives from the state each year. 

Burnett, who has advocated for working moms for over two decades, said the current state of child care in Mississippi isn’t just characterized by the state’s slow rolling out of federal grant funds; or its refusal to revisit the child support requirement; or its decision to redetermine eligibility during a pandemic; or its reluctance to use additional federal funding to supply more certificates.

“It’s all of it put together that results in parents that need child care not getting it,” Burnett said.

In Smith’s case, losing her child care — her punishment from the state for not working at least 25 hours — could have threatened her job altogether. 

She’s thankful her employer has been understanding. Her daughter returned to school in August, relieving some of the stress of juggling two kids and her job at home all day.

Just recently, as Smith was considering picking up a second job to get more hours, the insurance company gave her a promotion, bumping her to around 40 hours a week. It’s a sign of progress for this single mom, recognition of her tact with customers. 

Since the $12-an-hour job is currently remote, she’s making it work, however exhausting. 

Evenings are harder now. Smith is still working when Serenity gets off the bus after school. If Martez is napping, it won’t be for long.

“She’ll have him all hyped up, so I’ll be like, ‘Lord have mercy,’” she said. “I need to get her after school care and I need to get him in day care. That will help out a lot.”

“That’s not going to be possible without the voucher,” she added.

Child care centers say it can take 60 days for eligible applicants to be approved.

And Smith’s employer could call her back to the office any day now.

UPDATE: Two-and-a-half hours after publication of this story, Mississippi Department of Human Services supplied Mississippi Today with the following statement:

Parents and childcare providers were notified in February 2021, that redetermination would be put back in place beginning April 2021.  Additionally, per our policy, parents receive a 60-day notification and 30-day follow-up notification that their case is up for redetermination with instructions for completing the process.  Childcare providers receive a 30-day notice and have access to the Childcare Provider Portal, which allows them to review all certificate information, including redetermination deadlines, at any time.  While providers did not receive a written notification, as parents do, that information appears in the provider portal when the family’s case enters the redetermination period 60 days prior to their certificate/voucher end date.   

MDHS does not have a waitlist for certificates/vouchers.  We are processing applications, and any families that meet eligibility requirements receive a certificate/voucher for 12 months per ECCD policy.   Federal eligibility criteria limit MDHS.  For example, a household cannot exceed 85% of the state median income to be eligible for certificates/vouchers.   

Parents were notified via email which is how the Childcare Division handles beneficiary communication. Childcare providers were also notified in monthly Zoom information sharing session. Childcare providers have access to the Childcare Provider Portal regarding any of the children they care for in real time. The provider portal allows for a more secure transmission of children’s information in real-time to childcare providers. When certificates are up for redetermination, the notification shares the next steps to complete the redetermination 

ECCD provides an average of 20-22,000 children access to childcare each month.  

 ECCD issued temporary, 90-day emergency certificates to additional families who had never qualified for childcare vouchers during the pandemic.  Each of these emergency voucher families were given the opportunity to see if they would qualify for the program moving forward. Families in the pandemic related emergency certificates were eligible to apply for the 12-month childcare certificate. Emergency certificates reached their monthly peak in September 2020  with over 4,600. This is in addition to the 20-22,000 children enrolled in the traditional certificate program.   

Due to new Federal guidelines regarding the second round of stimulus funding (ARP) state that monies from ARP cannot be for the same purpose from CARES. Due to staffing levels, we want to ensure accountability of Cares Act funds; we are trying to ensure reports are received before the 2nd round of funding so it will not be problematic to the childcare providers from an accountability standpoint. To date, ECCD is still awaiting reports from over 300 childcare providers. Providers cannot receive ARP Stabilization Grants until their CARES funding reports have been filed. We believe that this policy is in the best interest of the providers and the state of Mississippi as the trustee of the stimulus funds.   

The Federal government requires childcare providers to be in good financial standing. Childcare centers must provide supporting documentation to show they are in good standing to receive additional funding from the ARP Stabilization Grants. ECCD distribution of ARP Stabilization Grants directly to Childcare providers will be exponentially more significant than the CARES Act Booster Shots.  

Due to staffing levels, we want to ensure accountability of all Cares Act funds. ECCD is attempting to close out all open grants related to the CARES funding before opening the 2^nd round of funding. To date, ECCD is still awaiting reports from over 300 childcare providers. Providers cannot receive ARP Stabilization Grants until their CARES funding reports have been filed with ECCD. We believe that this policy is in the best interest of the providers and the state of Mississippi as the trustee of the stimulus funds.  

To date, all CARES Act money has been dispensed. None of the funds have come back from providers. 

New policies put in place over the past year include:  

1) Covering parent Copays for families at or below the poverty line amounting to between $800,000 – $1,000,000 in additional payments per month going to providers.   

2) ECCD is also paying an enhanced rate of an additional 25% from April 2020 to December 2022;  

3) Payments are based on enrollment, not attendance. If the child stays home, the providers will still get the funds for that child. This is a permanent policy change. 

4) Removed child support as countable income when calculating eligibility for childcare vouchers.  This goes into effect 10/1. This change will lower the income requirements. 

MDHS has not had a waitlist in 4 years. (Editor’s note: Mississippi Department of Human Services reportedly cleared the Child Care Payment Program wait list in 2018, less than three years ago). We are serving every family that is eligible and applies that needs assistance. 

MDHS is monitors all relief funding to (1) ensure we comply with all funding requirements;(2) ensure that the funding to sustain childcare providers stretches as far as it can reach. 

To date, fourteen (14) states have activated the ARP funding. Most recently, Louisiana opened but ended up closing their distribution for unknown reasons. 

In reference to the additional public hearing and policy changes. Public hearings are required by law to gather comments on policy changes. Policy manual update proposals were shared at the public hearing and posted online with an email address for written comments. 

ECCD recently undertook a market survey from childcare providers 

• 92% approval on how ECCD handled the pandemic CARES Funds. 

Last year, ECCD spent 85% of discretionary funds on vouchers, 10 % higher than the federally mandated 75% of discretionary funds. 

Once a child is qualified and the voucher is approved, it is good for 12 months.  The parent is given a 60-day notice before the voucher eligibility expires. They will need to be verified.  During Covid, the Feds temporarily waived the CCDF redetermination. As of April 2021, redetermination is back in place unless the feds waive the requirement again. 

MDHS does not have a waitlist for certificates/vouchers.  We are processing applications, and any families that meet eligibility requirements receive  a certificate/voucher for 12 months per policy.  MDHS is limited by federal requirements in terms of eligibility criteria.  For example, a household cannot exceed 85% of the state median income to be eligible for certificates/vouchers.  MDHS monitors all relief funding to (1) ensure we comply  with all funding requirements and (2) ensure we’re using the funding to sustain childcare providers for as long as possible. CCDF, once we have a parent and voucher is given out is good for 12 months.  The parent is given a 60- day notice before the voucher eligibility. They will need to be verified.  During Covid, the Feds temporarily waived the CCDF redetermination, but now the CCDF determination is required unless we request a waiver from the Feds. 

The post Thousands of Mississippi parents lost child care assistance during pandemic as state hoards federal relief appeared first on Mississippi Today.

In Arkansas, Gov. Asa Hutchinson formed a committee of executive branch and legislative leaders to plan spending the state’s $1.5 billion in American Rescue Plan Act money. He directed them to include community, private sector and nonprofit leaders in decisions.

Tennessee created a task force that has held public meetings, and the state has already earmarked $1.35 billion of its COVID-19 stimulus money for water and sewerage infrastructure and $500 million for broadband expansion. These plans include matching grant programs for local governments and subsidies for qualified households for internet service. Tennessee also launched a support program to help local governments administer funds they are receiving separately and hired a consultant to do “pre-audit” checks that money is being properly spent.

Florida and Louisiana have already allocated millions in ARPA funds to help their tourism industries. Louisiana earmarked $300 million for local governments for water and sewerage. Florida is providing $1,000 bonuses to first responders, teachers and others who have soldiered on through the pandemic and child care assistance for health care workers.

At least 32 states have begun allocating ARPA funds, and others are actively seeking input and planning how best to use the money.

But Mississippi’s leadership, for the most part, has procrastinated on planning or spending the $1.8 billion coming directly to the state, half of which has been sitting in the state’s coffers for months. To date, there has been little planning or coordination among state leaders, or solicitation of input from communities. The money has a 2024 deadline for allocating it and a 2026 deadline for spending.

READ MORE: Is Mississippi up to the task of (properly) spending billions in federal pandemic dollars?

Of the state’s three top leaders, only Lt. Gov. Delbert Hosemann has offered any broad plan or actively sought input on ARPA spending. He’s toured the state for months, meeting with dozens of local government boards, business, healthcare and other groups. He’s proposed allocating as much as $900 million of the state-controlled money to match the $900 million local governments are receiving directly from the act. Hosemann says state and local governments should carefully plan and spend the money on projects “that have an impact not for one or two years, but one or two generations.”

But the other leaders do not appear sold on Hosemann’s plan, or to have any major plans of their own.

Gov. Tate Reeves has scarcely mentioned the money. As in most states, lawmakers in Mississippi will have the ultimate say on spending it. But other states’ governors have submitted their own plans or are working with legislative leaders on it. Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis pitched his plans for spending portions of ARPA to lawmakers in mid-March, shortly after the federal act was signed into law. Alabama Gov. Kay Ivey has been meeting with legislative leaders on ARPA spending, in part to figure out if the money could be used to help solve the state’s prison crisis.

With a previous $1.2 billion round of federal COVID-19 relief money to states, Reeves created a “Restart Mississippi” task force of mostly business leaders (many of whom were top campaign donors) to help plan spending and policy. But after he lost a fight with the Legislature over control of the money, the task force didn’t meet and went dormant. Reeves, who would have to sign off on much of the Legislature’s ARPA spending, has not publicly offered any specific plans or policy.

Last week, he told WLOX-TV on the Coast that he expects his annual budget recommendation to the Legislature in November will include his proposals for spending the federal money. In general, he said the bulk of the money should be spent on infrastructure such as water and sewerage.

House Speaker Philip Gunn likewise has not publicly offered any major spending or policy plans for ARPA money. He recently said he has some of his legislative team working on plans, but noted, “the good news here is we do have until 2024 to make those decisions.”

Gunn did join with Hosemann recently in stating that lawmakers stood ready to come into special legislative session — if Gov. Reeves would call one — to help with the summer’s spike in COVID-19 cases and deaths, to spend ARPA or other funds to help the hospital crisis. Both Hosemann and Gunn said the money could help pay nurses more and help alleviate a nurse shortage. But Reeves has said such a session wasn’t necessary as other emergency funds were available to shore up hospital operations. Reeves used these emergency federal funds to hire out-of-state nurses under contract.

In his WLOX appearance last week, however, Reeves said that if he had been able to control the money instead of the Legislature, he could already have paid the “health care heroes” Mississippi nurses with the funds.

The legislative leadership over the summer has been mostly focused on medical marijuana, Gunn’s proposal to eliminate the state’s personal income tax and a teacher pay raise. Lawmakers held summer committee hearings on these issues, but none on the unprecedented ARPA money flowing to state and local governments.

Some have questioned the state leadership’s hang-fire on ARPA planning and spending.

“What are we waiting on?” House Minority Leader Robert Johnson III, D-Natchez, said recently. “… This will take time to do it right. We at least need a special session for planning, or we at least need to be having some meetings.”

Johnson and Senate Minority Leader Derrick Simmons, D-Greenville, have both called for Reeves to call a special session to deal with ongoing pandemic issues and ARPA spending. Reeves has said he has no intention of calling such a session. His office did not respond to a recent request to discuss the challenges of administering ARPA and other federal pandemic funds.

It would appear lawmakers will wait until their regular session, which begins in early January 2022, to ponder ARPA spending. The Legislature faces many major issues and chores for that session, including decennial redistricting, the income tax elimination proposal and others. Some observers have questioned whether there is too much on the Legislature’s plate, and whether this will hamper proper planning and administration of the spending. Such delays in planning could also thwart any efforts at public and community input into the spending.

Gunn has said lawmakers need to be “very methodical” on spending the ARPA funds and noted, “We do have the luxury of time” with spending deadlines.

While the Legislature is used to spending the state’s money, it is not equipped to manage that spending down the line and is constitutionally prohibited from many of those functions. A coordinated effort with the governor’s office and myriad state agencies will be required, but there has been a lack of communication and cooperation between legislative leaders and Reeves during this administration.

It would also be nice for communities — the public — and state business leaders to have some say in how such unprecedented largesse of tax dollars is allocated. Mississippi has numerous problems like poverty, poor health and health care, and lagging education outcomes for which the extra money could be a godsend. But the plethora of needs could also make the task of where to direct spending more daunting.

It would appear this unprecedented amount of money flowing to Mississippi and other states will bring unprecedented challenges for its planning and oversight. And time is wasting.

The post Mississippi procrastinates as other states plan for, spend billions in pandemic stimulus appeared first on Mississippi Today.