Hello, my name is David Owles and I'm your cohost for Mississippi Happenings.
Joining me each week is my friend and cohost, Jim Newman.
Jim, how are ya?
Fine, it's a wonderful day in the neighborhood.
Yes, it is.
As you know, most as most of you know, we focus a lot of attention on public education, health care, our prison system, the Department of Corrections, voting rights and
Mississippi taxes.
We are especially pleased to have with us one of our members of the House of Representatives.
Representative Justice Gibbs.
he serves as member of the House of Representatives for the 72nd District.
And he has recently acquired this position in 2024.
He is also a graduate of the Harvard University and the Mississippi
School of Law.
So Representative Gibbs, thank you so much for being with us today.
We know that there's a lot of happenings in Jackson and we do appreciate your service to all Mississippians.
David and Jim, I just am thrilled to be with you guys today and grateful for the invitation.
is not my first time meeting you all, of getting acclimated with you guys, but my first time on the podcast.
So I'm glad to be the next guest on Mississippi Happenings.
We're glad to have you.
Taxes seem to be a, I don't know, every year a fight over who's going to get taxed, how much they're going to get taxed, what's going to get taxed.
I don't know what I'm leaving out, but I'm sure there's a couple of other adjectives that I've left out.
But the one thing that keeps coming back to me is that
the state of Kansas abolished their taxes and went bankrupt.
and the following year had to reinstate a tax system to be able to fund their government.
And it makes me wonder how much thought is really going into Governor Reeves wanting to eliminate the taxes entirely because it seems to me if he eliminates the taxes, what's
going to happen is that the taxes are going to come back to the counties to raise or the cities to raise and it's not going to be equitable.
throughout the state because we've got counties that have large tax bases and we got counties that got small tax bases just as like we got schools.
So what is the justification for lowering the taxes and eliminating them entirely?
Well, the justification, as you know, Jim, is coming from the party that holds the supermajority in the legislature.
Their justification is that they are hopeful that it will lead to more corporate investment and more corporate entities from moving to the state of Mississippi.
They have also campaigned and have formulated a narrative to their voter base about what
great things will happen when they don't have to pay state income tax, i.e., not having to pay that out of their paycheck.
The concerns that you have brought up are similar to the concerns that I have about the complete elimination of the state income tax.
These are some of the conversations that we are having in the legislature.
As a matter of fact, Jim, the minority leader, I just left a meeting where he talked about how
a portion of the bill would generate $400 million to go to our Department of Transportation as a way of luring people to support the legislation.
But we have seen in the history of this state where when we are in a shortfall, when we are constrained, money that is supposed to be allocated to help with roads and bridges or
our Department of Transportation has been taken out because we need that money to stay afloat.
So listen, we have
We understand what the bill is intending to do.
He has served in this legislature longer than I have.
It's other members who have served longer who has been a part of negotiations with the previous speaker and previous tax policy.
This is something that is definitely concerning to me in regard to what we've seen happen in other states.
This is what you brought up in the state of Kansas.
And as you can see, both chambers have
come up with their own unique ways of trying to dampen the concern about this complete elimination.
The House has a phase out plan.
The Senate, I believe, has some sort of a phase out, which is not over the same period of time as the House's plan.
But I am honestly in agreeance with some of the concerns that you've raised about that complete elimination.
And I often wonder, and this goes back to the Democratic Party and not...
any specific legislators.
Why do the Democratic representatives and senators not raise holy hell?
Democrats want to negotiate and get along with, as opposed to just saying, hell no, we're not going to do it.
It's not fair.
It's not the right thing to do.
And we're not going to participate.
If you wanna do it, do it yourself.
And then when it comes election time, we know who to blame.
Well, there's some disagreement with that, Jim, and within the caucus, I'll tell you.
Because if you pull yourself out of the process, you're not attempting to maybe dampening some harmful legislation that would pass had you not been at the table or had you not
tried to be at the table to have some sort of impact on what you may not agree with.
But if you can make it a little bit better, if there's something that you can do to where it's not as harmful to
Mississippians as a whole, knowing that we have a super majority, as you stated, knowing that it's going to eventually pass because we know how to do addition and we know that the
governor is hell been on signing this.
I don't believe that my job is just to simply go up there and just to say, hell no.
If I have relationships that I have tried to build to where people will actually take some of my concerns into consideration and
hopefully amend parts of the bill that they will be amendable to.
So there are some legislators who agree 100 % with what you're saying.
Just say hell no, raise hell, speak out against the bill, trash it, and let it pass and move on.
And then there are others who have opened partially a door with leadership and people on the other side of the aisle because they're not being as
angry or aggressive about how awful the bill is and that has provided a small opening for them to be able to, for the majority to consider some of the concerns that they have.
It seems like what you're kind of having to do is pick your fights and you have to really go off on this one.
No, we're not going to do it, but also you as a negotiator.
And I feel like that's what basically what you and all representatives are and senators are.
you know, your negotiators that you're trying to get the best deal for all Mississippians.
We do know that Governor Reeves, he really is not happy with the state income tax plan.
And he's a little bit more receptive to the House plan.
Can you tell us what's the big difference between the Senate plan and your House plan that was passed?
Well first, the House plan would eliminate the income tax entirely over a 10-year period.
There will be no income tax.
It will result in a $2.2 billion cut to our state's revenue.
The Senate plan does not go that far.
The Senate plan does not completely eliminate it.
Governor Reeves wants a complete elimination.
One of our main concerns is how is this going to affect our state agencies?
How is this going to affect social services in the state?
Are we thinking about that right now?
Or are we just thinking about getting to the goal line of jumping up and down saying we were able to accomplish one of our major priorities, which is eliminating it entirely?
So those are some of the big ticket differences between the legislation.
He does not like the Senate plan, but we know that the Senate plan would be less harmful, less damaging to Mississippians, both conservative and Democrats in this state as a whole.
And generally, think he wants to see, he doesn't believe in the negotiating.
He wants the entire package.
of what he envisioned prior to the session passing.
Same thing with 1433.
Same thing with INSPIRE, right?
INSPIRE last year was something that he wanted to be passed in its complete form.
Well, INSPIRE was not passing its complete form.
What we have is Mississippi Student Funded Formula, which is because of the differences that were ironed out in conference between both chambers of government.
So his strategy...
which he hopes is going to be a successful one for this legislative session is throw cold water on the Senate's plan and let's run with the House's plan.
All right, let's say you do away with all the taxes.
Who's going to pay for the services?
There you go.
I mean, that goes back to my initial point.
We can all do addition.
So if we don't have the money to fund those social services, then there won't be any social services being adequately funded.
What I think that we need to focus more on is putting that in black and white on paper so that legislators who are having questions in regard to it can actually see it written out
to understand how
you
be the percentage of each department that would be weakened because of passing this big piece of legislation.
But there are also aspects of the tax bill that people like.
There are aspects of the tax bill that people in my community like.
So when I go to a homeowners meeting, Jim and David, people are talking about the fact that we promised, when we ran for office as Democrats, to help the PERS system.
They talked about us.
making sure that we will help public education.
Well, there are aspects of this bill that would do that.
The local sales tax option that would go from 1.3 to 1.5, and it would add almost $45 million in tax revenue for the city of Jackson.
Well, one of the main concerns that people have here is every time they call their city, the city tells them, well, we've documented the issues that you want us to come fix,
whether it's a pothole or your street, but we don't have the revenue to be able to fix it efficiently and quickly.
So there are aspects of the bill that folks in my community, District 72, a very educated community, they do their homework.
When I go to a homeowners meeting, they come in with the bill printed out, and it's highlighted.
And they say, Representative Gibbs, this is your mailer.
And your mailer says that you are going to help the PERS system.
This bill speaks about how it would invest $100 million on an annual basis into PERS.
by utilizing the funds from the Mississippi State Lottery System.
And we know that the EEF fund, the Education Enhancement Fund, has operated inefficiently.
And so maybe this is a better way of trying to fix that problem.
So what I'm saying is, as legislators, we have to identify the pieces that are going to be harmful, but we also have to explain to our constituencies, see our constituents.
and understand what their true concerns are and make sure that they're heard.
My vote on this bill was a present vote and I stand behind my present vote because of the aspects of that bill that my homeowner, presidents and homeowners have brought to my
attention.
And they're right.
But again, these are the strategies that the super majority will utilize so that they can have better numbers in terms of passage.
Alright.
up two interesting topics.
PERS, which is, and correct me if I'm wrong, that's the Public Employees Retirement System.
Okay, tell us just a little bit about that and then I think Jim's got a question when we get through that.
But tell us a little bit about what's going on with PERS.
Yeah, so we're just, we're in a long standing situation now where we're wanting to make sure that Perth can stand on its own, that there's gonna be enough money to be able to
afford those who retire and be able to afford retirement.
We're having employees that are coming into the system and the problem is that there's just not enough funding.
So we need to find a way
of putting a lump sum or a dedicated revenue stream into the system so that the PERS system can stay afloat.
This is something that the PERS itself has asked the legislature to do, is to give it a dedicated revenue stream to try to help the system out.
And I was thinking that that request was falling on deaf ears until actually reading the bill and seeing that this was something that was
put into the bill in order to satisfy their request and also satisfy those who have concerns in regard to the entire system being adequately funded.
So, and there's many ways of doing that.
I want to be very clear about that.
We have many ways of how we can help PERS find a dedicated revenue stream from a legislative standpoint.
This is just what's on the table currently.
I do not believe that that's in the Senate's version of the bill.
but it's something that is within the House versions of the bill.
And this is, again, another tennis ball that we're juggling throughout the entire process.
I can't get to a yes because of what Mr.
Newman has stated, which is also a major concern of constituents in my district.
What happens when we completely eliminate the state income tax?
And what we can't do is say, well, it's going to be, it's going to...
it's going to wean itself off in 10 years.
And we always have the opportunity to come back and revise it.
Well, how often does that happen?
How often does it happen?
I mean, if you look at M.A.E.P., if we just take that formula, for example, well, how often did it happen?
It happened twice when it was actually fully funded in a way in which the bill stated that it was supposed to be fully funded.
So we can't put our trust in this idea that
or we could just come back to the table, which is why this is so consequential.
doesn't part of that bill allow counties to.
raise property taxes.
the House version or the Senate version?
The house version.
I'm not sure, honest with you, I'm not sure.
So that is another concern.
Representative Chuck Taylor actually brought that concern up on the House floor and did not get a clear answer.
I think that it has the potential of raising property taxes.
But when it comes to the obligation that is put on those counties, they're making it clear that this is an opt in or opt out in terms of the local sales tax.
I don't view it as such.
I think that everybody is going to opt in.
It's designed to where if you want to revenue, if you want to have a benefit, you're going to have to opt in.
So it doesn't seem to be an option, excuse me, for me.
I think everyone is going to want to opt in in regards to that provision of the piece of legislation.
And of course, I'm sorry I did not mention the 5 % flat tax on retail fuel sales.
And that's the stream that will go directly to the Department of Transportation, the $400 million that will be generated from that flat tax.
I've been told, and I've done some research on the fact that ours would still be lower than the region that we live in, in terms of what other neighboring states are charging.
But again, one of my concerns is when we get into a situation where we have to dig ourselves out of a hole because of what we're doing over here in regard to the complete
elimination,
How can we be so sure that we're not going to have sticky fingers, for the lack of a better word, Jim, and pulling money out of pockets that it was originally intended to help
people with their roads and their state highways?
Yeah, gasoline tax, we've had the lowest at 18 cents.
And like you said, it's going to go up if this passes by 5 cents.
So we'd have a 23 cent gasoline tax per gallon, which still would keep us close to the bottom.
Yes, sir.
But we have to do our role in thinking proactively, thinking about the future of what this could do with our entire budget.
Now, in terms of the surplus that we have received, the $750 million in state surplus, well, do we have assurances that the surplus is going to fill in the gap?
with what we're trying to eliminate when it comes to the state income tax.
Well, this goes right back to what I was initially saying.
We have no guarantees of that.
And some of us are battling with this idea that while it's not being clearly stated, we are going to be underfunding our state's most crucial services by voting for something
that seems appealing on the front end.
but might not be as appealing on the back end.
Well, the way President Trump and Elon Musk are going, it would seem that we're going to start getting less revenue from the federal government than we have.
And as we cut taxes, get less money from the government, I could see us getting in some...
really not so pleasant situations where we're not looking out for the welfare of our citizens.
We're just trying to make ends meet and we're not able to.
That's right.
Gibbs, I'm sorry, go ahead.
Go ahead, David.
I agree.
And I also agree in regards to what we're seeing happening right now on Capitol Hill in regard to the Medicaid cuts.
You know, I agree when it came to the debate that happened last year.
one second, I need to connect my, my laptop.
I don't want to cut it for this to cut out.
I apologize, Jim.
okay.
will take care of it, so we're good.
have a chord these days.
Okey dokey.
All right, perfect.
Okay, I'm sorry, I'm back.
No worries, we're good.
if he cut, you know, they cut eight billion, we haven't had Medicaid expansion.
So we're probably not going to be hurt as bad as states like Alabama, New York, Texas that have had Medicaid expansion.
But the dollars that come in, the matching dollars that come in for Medicaid are going to be cut.
And I just feel sorry for the people that are on Medicaid, that apparently in Washington, there's no concern about their welfare.
So it's going to fall back on the states to look out for its citizens.
And I do worry about our cutting taxes to the point that ultimately we end up cutting services to those that need it the most.
Absolutely.
you know, what we're seeing right now on Capitol Hill is a complete assault on our Medicaid system countrywide.
What we're also seeing is a commander in chief who is prioritizing his grand idea of sending stimulus checks back to the American people, in my opinion, as a way of bribing
them.
to support his party in the 2026 congressional elections.
He understands he has advisors who have showed him the effect of what happened in 2010 when Barack Obama was president and we were endured with the Tea Party movement.
He knows what happened when he came into office in 2016 and the congressional election that happened in 2018.
This is a concerted effort to try to
stimulus checks in the hands of Americans while usurping them from everything else.
Almost as a magician trick.
Because one of the main things that he talked about when he ran against Vice President Harris was, and one thing that people were manipulated by was, President Trump gave me a
check.
And that is what I think he is doing.
I have family members who work for the federal government.
I have a family member who lives in Jackson who has to now move to Austin, Texas.
I have a family member who half of her department in the VA got an email asking them to give them five things that they did in the office or they will be let go while the other
half didn't get an email at all.
And they're scared to death because they didn't get any email, but they're thinking that they're going to be let go.
Our federal government is literally in a crisis and there are pro-Trump people who voted for them.
And by God, I feel bad for them, but they put their trust in this man.
and a lot of folks' lives have been turned upside down because of what he's doing with Doge.
Yes.
And then we're going to get a check for $5,000.
it's going to, and one of the things that's so interesting is the checks that we got before.
They were signed by Donald J.
Trump.
You know, and that's where the perception is.
And these new, when we get the other stimulus checks, they're going to be signed by Donald J.
Trump and everybody's going to be, everybody's going be happy.
But we don't realize or we're not made aware.
We're not informed enough to know what we're losing.
You know, we are losing the Department of Education.
You know, we are losing these federal employees.
Mississippi has over almost 20,000 federal employees.
And Florida, and this is going to be a big deal, they have about 60,000 federal employees.
So there's going to be, there's going be some interesting talk between Governor DeStantis and President Trump.
What question that I've got for you earlier, you mentioned the program Inspire.
Will you tell us a little bit about that program?
So the Inspire Act was a proposal, legislative proposal.
And this was a big part of the speaker's agenda last year.
This was to overhaul the way in which we fund our public school system.
So we were doing away with M-A-E-P, and we were bringing Inspire into the mix.
The bill, it changed the way in which the student base rate was calculated.
and increase the amount that we would put into the student-based rate and the weights that were added on top of that, there were weights for different categories.
For instance, English-speaking learners.
For those school districts that had a certain percentage in regards to poverty level, there were weights that were added on top to where we were able to see a very broad list
of what individual school districts were receiving had MAEP being fully funded.
which it had not been, versus what Inspire would have done.
Now, this is also a piece of legislation that we fought hard against because we believe that the language would have opened the door for this grand plan of school choice, which
is what we have killed this year, House Bill 1433, which is not a good piece of legislation.
Well, after the Senate's
proposal, as you know, both proposals were passed within each chamber.
We had to go to conference.
Within conference, there was an agreement made by both chambers.
And the result of that is the Mississippi student funding formula that we have now that adds over $200-plus million into our education system here within the state of
Mississippi.
Sometimes we can get a little confused about the title.
It's meant to try to attract people to the bill.
It's meant to give buzzwords to the media and to the press.
But we now have what is known as the Mississippi Student Funding Formula that has put more money into public schools.
Jackson Public Schools that I represent has seen over 18 plus million dollar infusion in its annual
of funding, which they have contributed towards teacher pay raises, as well as infrastructure upgrades.
And Madison County public schools, in all fairness, did not see anywhere near the type of increase that JPS saw.
But Madison County enjoys a much more fruitful tax base to where they're not going to be as damaged in a way in which school districts such as JPS could have been damaged.
in regard to the formula.
So we are still tracking the progression of this formula, how well it's doing.
And this is also the reason as to why we don't need to move so quickly into trying to reshape the way in which our children go to school in this state.
If we don't even have a track record of how this brand new formula is working, why are we moving so quickly in regard to the proposals about school choice?
It just doesn't really make much sense.
And also from what we're seeing, and we love your thoughts about this, you know, it appears that money from our public education system, the tax money for our public schools,
they are being funneled to school choice.
Tell us your thoughts about that.
Absolutely.
And the provisions that were located in 1433 gave me great, great pause and concern because the language stated that if a child was a part of a D or F rated school district,
they would have the opportunity to move to a A or B school district.
However, if that A and B school district was at capacity, that is how the door opens to allowing the money that would have gone to the public school district that they were
initially in.
to being transferred out of that public school district into a private school.
But the language doesn't make much sense.
I graduated from Jackson Public Schools.
I attended A-rated schools such as Power APEC Performing Arts Complex, Murrah High School, which was a grade five a few years ago.
We have the number one elementary school in the state, Obama Magnet.
It's number one.
But based on the language of the bill,
with the five year time that you're allowing school districts to be rated D or F, you could move a child out of the best rated elementary school and you could send them to an
AB rated district.
But that doesn't mean that the school that they're moving into is any better than the school that they came from.
So there are a lot of loopholes in the bill that does not make sense.
And there were other problematic portions of the bill.
allowing teachers who work at a charter school to automatically move their child.
Doesn't have to be a DF rated district.
Doesn't have to go to A or B rated district next.
If you work in a charter school, you can move your child.
Well, now we're prioritizing the convenience of the teacher over what could be a quality public education for that child.
So I thought that it would lead to a domino effect of some really hazardous things happening within our education system.
MAE, the Parents Campaign, and a whole host of others stood up and fought this bill vigorously, as well as those on the Education Committee, which I serve on.
And I'm glad that we were able to defeat that this year.
Good.
Congratulations on that.
public schools.
I'm a K through 12 graduate.
It's just the bread and butter.
Cut.
is, it's the future of our state.
I don't care whether, I mean, honestly, I really don't care whether they're immigrants or, just, we've got to have an educated population, a well-educated population to attract
industry.
And the only way that can happen
is to have an educated public.
I think you're right on, Representative Gibbs.
Hold tight.
Don't lose it.
That's it.
We had the opportunity to interview Nancy Loom with the Parents Campaign.
And also we interviewed Erica Jones, Director of the Mississippi Association of Educators.
And they both share your passion for public education as well.
And so it was good to talk to them and get their thoughts on that.
Let's talk a little bit, we can kind of switch gears a little bit, but still going back to taxes.
We know that Mississippi has the highest tax rate for groceries.
Let's talk, tell us a little bit about that, Representative Gibbs.
So we do.
And both proposals from the House and the Senate plan on reducing the tax that we have on our groceries.
But if we're allowing the local sales tax option that will rise from 1.3 to 1.5, if we're allowing that tax to also apply to groceries, I mean, how much of a reduction are we
really seeing?
Do you see what I'm?
Do you see what I'm saying?
So again, when you are campaigning and when you're pushing the narrative about we're reducing the tax on groceries, we kind of need to be a little bit more transparent about
what are people going to see when they're actually checking out of the grocery store?
When they get their receipt, do they see any effect?
So that is what makes this bill so convoluted because there are cities, municipalities,
who see the fact that this can generate additional funds for their city to spend and they say, well, this is an attractive piece to it.
Well, if that's an attractive piece to it, then we need to be a little bit more honest about the piece regarding the grocery tax.
It's almost like you're just shuffling apples into another basket.
Gotcha.
I like your analogy on that.
We're taking it out of one, like you say, take it out of one basket, put it in the other, but at the same time, we, the taxpayers, are left holding the basket.
Right.
And there might be, I mean, there might be a reduction, but based on the way in which the bill is written, it's not going to be as clear cut as is being explained.
Do you think that Governor Reeves will call a special session regarding the tax proposals?
I think it's a possibility.
I think the decision in regards to what happens as we move forward, everywhere from who would be selected to conference, everywhere from whether or not the Senate even takes up
the bill for debate in committee.
There is a possibility, and I've heard some rumblings in the Capitol that he might consider doing that.
This is what's so interesting about the way in which it works.
Downtown Jackson, the House plan put their bill out first.
Our bill was the only bill for about two, two and a half weeks before the Senate rolled out their proposal.
And so he might have felt good and felt momentous about that bill to where now he might be much more hell bent on
all in a special session to get all that he wants, right?
He may not have an appetite for compromise.
But again, I do have an appetite for compromise.
I'm in the minority and I want the least harmful piece of legislation possible for the citizens of Mississippi.
You you just brought up, you mentioned a word that keeps coming across my mind.
And when I look at the candidates running for office in Tupelo, you mentioned you're in the minority.
All of the candidates that are running for municipal positions in Tupelo are minorities.
How do we go about, as a Democratic party, attracting some white people to run?
We've got white Democrats.
We've some of them run, come close to getting elected but not quite making it.
But at the local level, it just seems throughout the state that...
where we have majority minority districts, everything is minorities.
And then there are no whites or no whites running anywhere.
You got any idea how we can address that or what we might do?
I know it's.
I don't know if there is an answer, but if you got any thoughts, I'd appreciate them.
Well Jim, let me start here.
My first thought is that I think part of this has been very deliberate.
Take the House of Representatives for example.
Today we have one white Democrat.
That's Bob Evans.
We just lost a Democrat who is right to the north of me, Tom Miles I believe is his name, who was serving due to redistricting.
We have lost a handful of white Democrats that served in the House that made the party, the Democratic Party, much more diverse.
As you guys know, you all have been very aware of when Democrats were switching to the Republican Party for advantageous reasons throughout the Barbara administration.
The reason why I say that is deliberate is because unfortunately we found that one of the best weapons in order to win or to receive what we want in this state is to use the racial
stick.
Democratic Party now in the legislature is almost entirely black, while the Republican Party is almost entirely white.
We, and I agree with you, we have to now start moving.
We have to start changing that, that, that, that reality to get back to where we see representation from both races.
because I think it can manipulate people in terms of what party they think they need to support, what party they think is going to see them more than how the other party sees
them.
The Democratic party, as you all know,
I call it the party for working class Mississippians.
We care about our middle class.
We care about our working class.
And we understand the historic, the history of this state and how our history has to shape where we need to go.
That is not the story of what the Republican party is pushing.
But when people see who's representing them visually,
they see people who look like them, and that can attribute to them wanting to go and vote for those persons.
So as you know, one of the things that we're trying to do in the party is we're trying to develop a database of successful folks in communities that people can identify and people
who they know, who they feel comfortable with, and persuading them to run for office.
I was just speaking to Markelle Bolden, our executive director, on some of the things that we're going to try to push.
delivering tool kits to some people that we've identified in some of these areas.
There is a representative right now who is a Republican who is serving in a Democratic district.
I don't think a lot of people know about that.
I'm talking about a D plus 2.1 district.
So, had we have people to go out and vote, that individual will be a Democrat.
And we're gonna see some more of this happening later on this year because I'm sure you guys know about the recent court decision.
that is going to redraw the maps that we have in both the House and the Senate.
So we got to make sure that we're getting our folks out to vote.
But I agree with you.
There is much more to be done in order to attract all Mississippians to understand that the Democratic Party is working on behalf of them.
And we're not just a party that is only representing Black Mississippians.
We represent the entire state.
We represent people who
are often go unrepresented by their own state representatives and senators.
That's very true.
Jim and hopefully you two will agree with me is that we feel that it has to start at the local level, meaning we've got to get Democrats to run for Alderman.
to run for mayor, to run for county positions.
And then hopefully we get them out, we get the name recognition, we get them elected, and then we can move them up to the House and to the Senate and do to that.
that's something I know that in DeSoto County, we're working very hard at the local level with this year being the municipal elections.
And if I may say this as well, I believe in working two strategies at once.
While we work within the confines of this unfair system, we also need to be thinking about what really needs to happen, which is a complete overhaul of our districts, of our state
house districts.
We are a state that when Jim Hood ran for governor, I believe it was around a 40,000 vote difference.
Well, when our most recent gubernatorial candidate ran, he shrunk that difference by, I believe, about 25,000.
When you look at the percentage of folks who are going to the polls to vote for one vision versus the other, there's no reason why the composition of their House of Representatives
is in the state that it is in today.
That is a super majority, where the Democratic Party has
about 38 to 39 silent seats in a state where they've almost won the gubernatorial election in under 25,000 votes.
So there has to also be effort judicially.
And I know that there are some groups, some national groups that's been working in this sphere for a while now.
But as long as
The House of Representatives and the Mississippi Senate has full and complete control over carving their own state district maps.
I believe that we're going to continue to be in this fight.
I think we are too and that's what prompted the question.
I've always been amazed.
You may or may not know this, but the state of California, which has I don't know how many times the population we have.
They have less counties.
I mean like think they got somewhere in the range of 30 or 40 counties and that's it.
And we've got so many counties.
We've got what, 82 counties and we've got counties that we don't even have Democrats that run.
when they wouldn't be opposed.
So I don't like the super majority.
It works against the system of equal representation.
And it certainly doesn't protect the minority.
And I'm not talking about race.
I'm talking about minority period, the Democrats.
Jim, when you talk about Democrats running unopposed, I'm assuming you're talking about Democrats running unopposed in a primary, not a general, but a primary.
We have counties that there's just one Republican running.
There's no Democrat.
Gotcha.
As we wind down, Representative Gibbs, I want to talk about your recent success.
You've had many, but your recent success, and we thank you for it, where you sponsored a bill that
that would force the Mississippi Department of Corrections to supply protective gear for inmates.
Thank you for that legislation and I'm excited that you were able to get it passed.
Will you tell us about that?
Sure.
So last year, I attended a press conference on the federal courthouse steps with formerly incarcerated people who are now, as I consider, fully fledged citizens of this state.
At that press conference, there is now a federal lawsuit that is within litigation because there have been practices that has happened within the correctional system that has
contributed towards very
bad illnesses, some very painful, and some that are also terminal cancer due to the usage of utilizing raw chemicals during work jobs or work programs within the correctional
system without any form of protective wear.
I want to be clear about some things.
Let's just say you use bleach to clean your bathtub once every two weeks, OK?
You might wear gloves.
You might watch out to not inhale a lot of fumes.
But what if you were using that bleach or any other harmful raw chemicals every single day without any form of protective wear?
What if you're now experiencing symptoms that are not being taken seriously when you try to address them with those who work within the system?
So there are two prongs here.
The first prong is the preventative measure.
The preventative measure is forcing, as you stated, the Department of Corrections to provide protective wear.
And if they don't want to provide the protective wear, they cannot use the chemicals that are listed in the bill.
that have contributed towards these sort of illnesses.
If they want to go and get organic chemicals that will do the same job, they're able to do that.
But this job would force them to provide humane protective wear for those who are on work duty in the correctional facilities.
The second prong is taking the health care of these incarcerated persons seriously.
Representative Becky Curry, is the new chairwoman of Corrections, I have to applaud her because she is making the effort of going into the correctional facilities and bypassing
the wardens, bypassing the employees and speaking directly to the people themselves.
And that is how she has been able to come up with a comprehensive list of the problems that we need to be addressing as we move forward within not only this legislative session,
but the next four years.
So what my bill does is it's going to protect those inmates who are on work duty within the correctional system so that they don't have to go through the anxiety and fear that
they are developing illness by simply doing their job.
And a lot of these folks have gotten out due to good behavior.
Ms.
Susie Balfour, who couldn't make it to my press conference, we had her attorney fly from out of state.
Well, she's undergoing very
a harsh chemotherapy at this point because she does have terminal cancer as a result of using these chemicals.
I met a gentleman who had two brain surgeries due to exposure because of him utilizing the same chemicals in the department.
So we are
speaking up for people who don't have the capacity to speak up for themselves in places like the Mississippi State Capitol to say this is just one of the many things that we need
to do to protect these incarcerated people and to make sure that they're being treated like human beings.
Now will this bill apply?
Will this bill also apply to the correctional facilities that are privately owned?
any facility that is under the Department of Corrections.
So from my understanding, those privately owned facilities are still under the confines of the Department of Corrections.
I don't think that they are a separate entity, but we do have correctional systems facilities in the state already that do provide some sort of protective lawyer.
The problem is that it is not codified into law.
we have those correctional facilities that are not doing this practice.
So this would make sure that across the board, regardless of your transfer or regardless of where you are within the state, you will have protective wear.
But Jim, that is also something I need to add to my list to make sure that that is not a loophole that any probably owned facility would also have to abide by this state law.
This is a really good step towards the treatment of prisoners.
A good friend of mine, Caleb Bedillion writes for the Marshall Project and has been doing a series on the jails in the counties and having public defenders.
And it's my understanding that right now, not every county has a public defender and an attorney may be appointed by a judge.
But once he has made his appearance, the attorney no longer has to take care of him.
So I really applaud you for this.
I think we're working in the right direction towards taking care of people.
And just because you happen to be in prison or a prisoner, you're not any less important to God or to mankind.
You're just in a different position right now.
So thank you.
I appreciate that it's been a collaborative effort.
The Rich Foundation, Ms.
Pauline Rogers, who's formerly incarcerated, who's doing incredible things in this state, who's developed a network of those who've been formerly incarcerated that are bringing out
these issues to light.
I do want to just say I know we're running out of time, but this is not a one size fits all solution.
We also have formerly incarcerated people who have
who have stepped on the floors.
If you're cleaning the floor with raw chemicals, chemicals that are so harsh, some of them stepping their bare foot on the floor has resulted in sores being created underneath their
feet, know, over and over and over again by that constant exposure.
So there are other issues that we need to continue to look at to figure out next legislative session, how are we gonna continue to...
to protect our inmates and really eradicate this public image and this perception that we have created about the state of Mississippi and our correctional facilities.
When you have Jay-Z and Roc Nation filing federal lawsuits because of what they are seeing or what they are hearing, I mean, we really, if we're gonna be about changing the image of
how our state is perceived, which is going to result in more corporations and companies coming here as opposed to a tax cut.
then that's how we're gonna be moving down the right path.
So I just wanna say that it's something that I've developed a passion for because I've sat down with these formerly incarcerated people and they're good people and they deserve to
vote and they deserve to be a part of this process in Mississippi.
We recently talked to Greta Kemp Martin with Disability Rights Mississippi.
Had a great conversation with her.
reports that they talked about within the
Mississippi Department of Corrections was inadequate medical staffing, inadequate staffing of correctional officers, inadequate health care and policies and practices along with ADA
non-compliant services, procedures, buildings and utilities.
So this is a major issue.
We do appreciate you bringing that up.
Real quickly, let's, you mentioned voters.
rights for the incarcerated.
Tell us a little bit about that.
You know, who could vote?
Do they get an opportunity to vote if they're still incarcerated?
How do we, you know, tell us a little bit about that.
Sure.
So currently, it's within our state law that if you have been convicted of a felony, and there's a list, there's a long list, including nonviolent felonies, if you've written a
bad check, for example, your right to vote has been taken away from you.
And it has been taken away from you.
The only way in which it can be reinstated is through the process of the office of the governor.
or what we do in the legislature, which is through Judiciary B, bringing up the specific name of the Mississippian, advocating on the restoration of their right to vote.
Last legislative session, Representative Kabir Karim proposed an excellent bill that would have added thousands and thousands of voters back to the voter rolls who have been
convicted of nonviolent offenses.
That was passed in the House.
It was not
taken up in the Senate.
There is a senator who made it clear that she would not bring the piece of legislation out of her committee.
So we're talking about one person stopping the process of a bipartisan bill that was voted on the floor of the House of Representatives.
It did not even come up on the floor on the Senate side because this senator felt as though it was not a good bill for Mississippi.
This year, we did not get that bill out of committee.
This is something that we are going to continue to push every single year.
This is on our list of top priorities.
But again, this is a part of the dance.
And this goes back to the considerations that I've taken into effect in regard to the tax policy.
We have to be smart about what we do at the Capitol, because there are other priorities.
that are incredibly important that we don't want to fall on deaf ears.
We still have to work towards a Medicaid expansion with or without a work requirement.
We still have to work towards restoring the voter rights of these formerly Mississippians who have been convicted of nonviolent felonies.
But you know what I want to say to end this in regard to this topic, one of the true reasons as to why there is so much opposition, it goes back to our conversation about
Brandon Presley coming within 25,000 votes to the governor's mansion.
So you allow people to get their right to vote back.
You have states in, I believe, Michigan and Wisconsin, they're allowed to vote in the prisons.
They have precincts set up because they value their citizens, their voices enough to where they understand they should be able to
have a deciding vote in terms of who's going to represent them on a statewide level.
There are underlying reasons as to why these bills die.
And that's one of the reasons.
keep up the fight.
want to share a quote, one of your quotes that you made when you were first elected.
This ties into exactly what you've been talking about.
You said when you were elected, you said, my mother always told me to always stay true to your word, never commit too early and
be always committed to your community and to the people who elected you.
A lot of people come here and they listen to lobbyists.
and other special interest groups, but it's the people of District 72 who gave me this opportunity.
And those are always going to be the individuals that I listen to when I say votes on the House floor.
So it's obvious you have stayed true to your mother's advice, and we admire you and respect you for that.
Jim, you got anything else?
yes.
One other thing, Representative.
Is there any effort going on to revise the state constitution so that we have four congressional districts instead of five and then the ability to restore the initiative
petition free of any encumbrances?
Because I know that they said that
If they restore the initiative petition, they would not allow women's to be had.
As far as I'm concerned, that's a freedom of speech issue and that should not be part of anything.
Absolutely.
In regard to it, it's a simple fix.
It's a simple fix.
It's something that could come up by a special session tomorrow if that was the governor's appetite to simply revise the language.
We will have to have the, I believe, 3 5ths vote to change it, but that would happen.
Everybody will fall into place.
But once they saw the opportunity of
pushing the narrative onto their people to strengthen the hold that they have on the majority of Mississippians by saying, the only way we're going to bring this initiative
back is if everyone agrees that we cannot bring up anything regarding women's reproductive health rights on the ballot initiative.
And not only that, Jim, but any issue that you bring up, that you fight to get signatures for, which also was going to be increased, by the way.
Even if that issue made it to the ballot and it passed, that issue still has to come back to the legislature.
And we have the prerogative of voting that issue up or down.
That is not a ballot initiative.
That is literally orchestrating in front of the constituents of pretending as though you're listening to their voice.
The reason of that, the reason Jim, is because
Not only was I shocked, but everybody in that capital was shocked when 70, over 70 % of Mississippians voted in favor of medical marijuana in this state.
They were 100 % sure.
There is no way that over 40 % of people in this state would ever agree to such a proposal, not in the state of Mississippi.
But people went to the ballot and they voted over 70%.
That again goes back to the underlying reasons as to why we're changing.
what should be a simple fix.
So this legislative session, I started with the public call at the very beginning of the session that we don't need to lose sight of the ballot initiative being a top priority the
same way in which it was in the 2024 legislative session.
But that bill did not see the light of day on each either side of the chamber.
So as we progress, we have to make sure that we're working to restore the ballot initiative next year.
with absolutely no restrictions.
I think it's insulting to the people of Mississippi, both Republican and Democrat, to think that we have to baby their ideas and what they think should happen in their state by
taking away their right and throwing away their ideas when they've worked so hard to get it on the ballot in the first place.
We agree with you.
any last words, comments or anything for us?
I am just grateful to have come on today to Mississippi Happenings.
This is an honor to be here.
And the last thing I will say is that we should never lose sight that the country as a whole, they're watching what we're doing down here.
Even when it's dealing with legislation that what we consider frivolous, whether it be closing three historically black colleges and universities, or whether it be authoring a
bill about bounty hunting, people are talking about it.
people on CNN, Fox News, MSNBC.
When we talk about wanting to attract business to this state, understand that your legislators have the authority to author anything and put it on the agenda that can be
potentially picked up by our media.
We have to take our role seriously.
I will not be authoring any legislation that I don't think could actually see the light of day.
I take my job very seriously.
And I don't believe in putting people through anxiety for fun.
Because that's similar to what happened last year with the closure of the universities and colleges.
We knew that the bill was going to die.
But what did that lead to?
That led to anxiety and fear amongst Mississippians.
And we could have avoided that.
So I thank you again for allowing me on.
I could talk for another hour.
Maybe I can come on next time.
would love to, this would be great.
You've done a great service to us and you've done a great service to Mississippi, Mississippians and a great service to our listeners and our viewers.
To our viewers, if you have any questions, comments, anything that you, any topics that you want to talk about, please drop us an email at.
ms happenings one at gmail dot com
These broadcasts are not free.
So if anybody feels like they would like to make a contribution towards contributing, David, there a, there's a side, Venmo or something at the bottom, is there not?
Cash app, okay.
All right.
The $MSHappenings you also will see the state, our logo, is the the shape of the state, and it also says, what?
it's got the cotton fields, it's got the state capital, it's got the Gulf of Mexico.
Sorry, Trump.
It's got the Gulf of Mexico.
We just call it the Gulf in Mississippi.
Exactly.
Well, Representative Gibbs, it's been great having you on.
We would love to have you back.
We thank you for taking your time.
You know that we know that you have been busy and you will continue to be busy and best of luck.
We so much admire you as a person and we admire and respect you for your passion that you have for Mississippi.
As always, may we never be indifferent.
to the suffering of others.