Recent editorials from Mississippi newspapers:
____
Feb. 24
The Commercial Dispatch on legislation over firearms inside courthouses:
Contrary to the views of some of our legislators, the Second Amendment is not under attack in Mississippi.
Common sense, on the other hand, takes a regular beating when our Legislature is in session.
On Tuesday, House Bill 571 - which clarifies a 1-year old law to make sure firearms are allowed to be carried in the courthouses across the state - passed through the Judiciary Committee and will soon face a vote on the House floor.
It is a reckless, potentially dangerous, piece of legislation we strongly urge representatives to reject.
The dispute which led to this new bill emerged shortly after the first law allowing guns at courthouses went into effect in July.
In October, an order from Chancery Judge Dorothy Colom advised the Lowndes County Board of Supervisors that compliance with the law required armed officers be stationed at each courtroom entrance.
Harry Sanders, the president of the board of supervisors, noted that would mean the county would have to provide as many as 16 officers to cover the county’s courtrooms. Currently, the courthouse has two officers stationed at the entrance of the courthouse.
In November, the board voted to consider the entire courthouse as an extension of the courtrooms when courts were in session.
It was a common-sense solution to a problem, supported by all of the supervisors and judges.
Other counties have enacted similar policies over the objections of gun activists, who have powerfully allies in the Legislature. The most prominent of these are Rep. Andy Gipson (R, Braxton), a pastor by trade and tireless gun advocate, who is also chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, and Gary Chism (R, Columbus), who is also a member of the Judiciary Committee.
Both common sense and experience tell us this is a dangerous measure. There are few public places where emotions run higher than in our courthouses and there are many instances where those emotions have erupted into violence. In the vast majority of those cases, the violence does not occur in the courtroom itself, but on other courthouse grounds. Adding guns to this volatile mix is bad, bad policy.
Lest it be perceived as a Conservative vs. Liberal dispute, those who have spoken out against this new bill are conservatives as well and have never expressed “anti-gun” sentiment.
People such Gipson and Chism believe gun rights extend to all public places. Yet it should be noted that there has never been any legislation allowing guns in the state Capitol. That suggests that even the most ardent Second Amendment purist acknowledges there is one place where guns should not be permitted.
We argue there is at least one other place were those limits should be enacted — our courthouses.
If representatives apply common sense, rather than bow to blind dogma, they will reject this bill on the grounds that it creates a problem where none exists.
Online:
https://www.cdispatch.com/
____
Feb. 19
The Greenwood Commonwealth on inflation and the state’s infrastructure:
Inflation is a concept that the Mississippi Legislature seems to have an extremely difficult time grasping, whether it be keeping up with it or exceeding it.
For instance, when it comes to taxes, lawmakers have been stubbornly resistant to acknowledging the idea that an excise tax - such as that imposed on gasoline and diesel - loses its purchasing power over time if it is not adjusted periodically for inflation.
The state continues to charge 18.4 cents per gallon at the pump, just as it did in 1987. If adjusted for inflation, the tax should be more than double that. Meanwhile, the cost of repairing and replacing dilapidated highways and bridges has not been stagnant. It is about three times as expensive as it was in 1987.
Because of lawmakers’ longstanding blindness to this inescapable economic fact - as the cost of doing something goes up, you must have more revenue to pay for it - Mississippi now has an infrastructure crisis that is costing motorists much more in time and repairs on their vehicles than if the gas tax had kept up with inflation.
When it comes, however, to ratcheting up how much those in public office can draw from the public till, lawmakers not only recognize the impact of inflation but will sometimes exaggerate it.
This week, the House voted overwhelmingly to increase the per diem from $40 to $150 that is paid to some state and local officials to attend board meetings outside their home counties. (The change would not apply to lawmakers themselves who take care of themselves by tying their per diem to more generous federal standards.) In defending the hike of 375 percent, House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Jeff Smith said the increase, which seems eyepopping on the surface, only keeps up with inflation that has occurred since the per diem was last changed in 1980.
Smith is only off by about 100 percent in his calculation of inflation. A solely inflationary increase would bring the per diem to $115.
The Senate is not expected to go along with the House number. It shouldn’t
Although an increase is in order, it shouldn’t be more than inflation
Online:
https://www.gwcommonwealth.com/
____
Feb. 17
The Clarion-Ledger on Mississippi veterans and the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs:
When American men and women enlist in the military, they sign a contract with the U.S. government. One party serves, protects, risks life and limb to honor a nation. And then the government compensates them for this service with pay, perks and a promise.
Serve the United States honorably, defend us from our enemies, and in turn, we’ll serve and protect you and your family.
It’s a promise that, unfortunately, hasn’t always been kept. As another mismanagement scandal rocks the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs - this time in the form of possible “excessive” paid administrative leave for VA employees - that promise sours a little.
In 2014 alone, 2,560 employees at the Department of Veterans Affairs spent at least one month on paid leave at a cost of $23 million to the taxpayers - veterans included. No other federal agency met that sum the same year.
Now, in the grand scheme of the gigantic U.S. budget, a few million may not mean much. But consider this: At the G.V. “Sonny” Montgomery VA Medical Center in Jackson, two surgeons, whose annual salaries total more than $500,000, have been on paid leave for more than two years.
That annual paid leave check comes out of the Jackson VA’s budget, but Mississippi veterans receive no care from the two physicians.
One is an ophthalmologist who no longer performs surgeries but draws a surgeon’s salary of $190,000 in annual base pay. He’s been working out of an office for facilities management, which handles housekeeping, safety, maintenance and other duties.
A neurosurgeon the Jackson VA suspended from surgeries, and then later from meeting patients, has sued the hospital claiming he was not given a valid reason for his suspension. He still pockets his $329,000 in annual base pay.
Health care isn’t cheap, but those two salaries could make a difference if the money were redirected to veterans, the men and women who were promised by the country they love that they would be taken care of after coming home.
VA Secretary Robert McDonald acknowledged employees remain on paid leave too long, adding that administrative leave was designed to take people out of the system while they were being investigated so they didn’t create adversity or harm.
The agency is working on making the process more efficient, one where employees can be investigated and disciplined more quickly and thus not continually draw salaries for long periods of time, McDonald said.
And that’s a commendable response, recognizing the VA system has been faced with countless challenges as veterans of past wars require more medical attention as they grow older and veterans of the most recent wars seek treatment for their battle scars.
This editorial isn’t to say the agreement is a bad promise nor that it’s an unattainable one. It’s a good deal, and most - if not all - Americans agree it’s one that must be kept.
Mistakes will be made, and the government certainly isn’t immune to making its fair share.
But keeping in mind the government is an entity created and controlled by all American citizens, when the promise to our veterans isn’t fulfilled with the utmost respect and gratitude, it reflects on each of us.
We - the government, the people - have to do better. Every disservice to our service members, no matter how great or small, is a dishonor to that contract paid for by blood, pain, and human life.
We made a promise. And it’s time to step up and fulfill our end.
Online:
https://www.clarionledger.com/
Please read our comment policy before commenting.