fbpx
Connect with us

Mississippi Today

Democrat Brandon Presley calls for overhaul of campaign finance laws

Published

on

TUPELO — Democratic gubernatorial candidate Brandon Presley on Thursday called for to reform Mississippi's notoriously lax campaign finance laws and expand the role of the state's Ethics Commission to enforce lobbying campaign contribution regulations.

Speaking in Tupelo, Presley called on lawmakers to pass a law that transfers campaign finance filings from the Secretary of State's Office, where it's currently housed, to the Mississippi Ethics Commission, which only handles some aspects of the current rules.

The Democratic candidate, currently north Mississippi's utility regulator, also urged state leaders to give the commission power to conduct random audits of candidates' campaign finance donations and expenditures to keep him and other politicians “on our toes.”

“We're going to propose this plan to restore pride, faith in state government,” Presley said, “to make sure that we're not the laughingstock of the nation when it to campaign finance reports.”

The current campaign finance laws are a confusing, often conflicting patchwork that requires three different state agencies to have some role in enforcing the regulations.

Advertisement

“It's a mess,” state Ethics Commission Director Tom Hood recently told Mississippi of Mississippi's campaign finance laws. “Changes have been made multiple times over multiple years, and it's like trying to put together a jigsaw puzzle that doesn't fit.”

READ MORE: Reform, ethics, transparency, fighting political corruption — it must be election time in Mississippi

While confusing, most state leaders agree that candidates are currently supposed to file campaign finance reports with the Secretary of State's office, but that agency mainly acts as a record-keeping entity. If candidates skirt the laws or fail to file a report, the agency forwards their name to the Ethics Commission for review.

The commission can then vote to levy fines against a candidate, but if a candidate fails to pay that fine, the commission, in theory, eventually notifies the to consider filing a civil suit against them to recover the unpaid fine.

Advertisement

Mississippi also spends less money on ethics enforcement — $730,000 — than other surrounding states, such as Alabama, which spends more than $3 million a year on ethics accountability.

But Presley said if he is elected, he would also urge legislators to appropriate more money and resources to allow the commission to handle more responsibilities.

Other proposals Presley outlined are:

  • Establishing a task force to recommend how state government can strengthen ethics regulations.
  • Supporting legislation to prohibit companies seeking a license, permit, or non-competitive contract from the state from donating more than $250 to political campaigns from the date of solicitation and for 12 months after the final award is made.
  • Requiring the governor's office and all state agencies to keep records of all meetings with lobbyists and companies and individuals lobbying the government for contracts or legislation that them.
  • Encouraging that campaign finance reports to be available, submitted online, easily accessible to the public, and due every 30 days in an election year and quarterly in non-election years.

The Democratic candidate has made ethics reform a central part of his statewide campaign, and he has called on lawmakers to pass laws that ban state from raising money while the is in session.

The political discourse over ethics reform between Presley and Republican Gov. Tate Reeves has devolved into a separate issue over who has donated to the two candidates campaigns for public office.

Advertisement

When asked recently about his presumptive Democratic opponent's ethics reforms proposals, Reeves' campaign did not substantively address Presley's policies, but criticized the Democratic candidate for accepting campaign donations from Richard Scruggs, who pleaded guilty to a federal bribery charge and a federal mail fraud charge in 2009.

Scruggs served a stint in prison, which he completed in 2014. He donated $10,000 to Presley's campaign, according to the candidate's most recent campaign finance report, and he regularly donates to political candidates in the state.

But Presley last said he is complying with current campaign finance laws and pointed the finger back at Reeves for previously accepting donations from such Nancy and Zach New, who pleaded guilty to crimes related to the state's welfare scandal and are waiting for a judge to determine their prison sentence.

Editor's Note: Dickie Scruggs has been a donor of . Donors do not influence Mississippi Today's editorial decisions, and a list of our donors can be found here.

Advertisement

This article first appeared on Mississippi Today and is republished here under a Creative Commons license.

Mississippi Today

2024 Mississippi legislative session not good for private school voucher supporters

Published

on

mississippitoday.org – Bobby Harrison – 2024-05-19 14:11:52

Despite a recent Mississippi Supreme Court ruling allowing $10 million in public money to be spent on private schools, 2024 has not been a good year for those supporting school vouchers.

School-choice supporters were hopeful during the 2024 legislative session, with new House Speaker Jason White at times indicating support for vouchers.

But the , which recently completed its session, did not pass any new voucher bills. In fact, it placed tighter restrictions on some of the limited laws the has in place allowing public money to be spent on private schools.

Advertisement

Notably, the Legislature passed a bill that provides significantly more oversight of a program that provides a limited number of scholarships or vouchers for special-needs children to attend private schools.

Going forward, thanks to the new , to the vouchers a parent must certify that their child will be attending a private school that offers the special needs educational services that will help the child. And the school must information on the academic progress of the child receiving the funds.

Also, efforts to expand another state program that provides tax credits for the benefit of private schools was defeated. Legislation that would have expanded the tax credits offered by the Children's Promise Act from $8 million a year to $24 million to benefit private schools was defeated. Private schools are supposed to educate low income students and students with special needs to receive the benefit of the tax credits. The legislation expanding the Children's Promise Act was defeated after it was reported that no state agency knew how many students who fit into the categories of poverty and other specific needs were being educated in the schools receiving funds through the tax credits.

Interestingly, the Legislature did not expand the Children's Promise Act but also did not place more oversight on the private schools receiving the tax credit funds.

Advertisement

The bright spot for those supporting vouchers was the early May state Supreme Court ruling. But, in reality, the Supreme Court ruling was not as good for supporters of vouchers as it might appear on the surface.

The Supreme Court did not say in the ruling whether school vouchers are constitutional. Instead, the state's highest court ruled that the group that brought the – Parents for Public Schools – did not have standing to pursue the legal action.

The Supreme Court justices did not give any indication that they were ready to say they were going to ignore the Mississippi Constitution's plain language that prohibits public funds from being provided “to any school that at the time of receiving such appropriation is not conducted as a school.”

In addition to finding Parents for Public Schools did not have standing to bring the lawsuit, the court said another key reason for its ruling was the fact that the funds the private schools were receiving were federal, not state funds.  The public funds at the center of the lawsuit were federal COVID-19 relief dollars.

Advertisement

Right or wrong, The court appeared to make a distinction between federal money and state general funds. And in reality, the circumstances are unique in that seldom does the state receive federal money with so few strings attached that it can be awarded to private schools.

The majority opinion written by Northern District Supreme Justice Robert Chamberlin and joined by six justices states, “These specific federal funds were never earmarked by either the federal government or the state for educational purposes, have not been commingled with state education funds, are not for educational purposes and therefore cannot be said to have harmed PPS (Parents for Public Schools) by taking finite government educational away from public schools.”

And Southern District Supreme Court Justice Dawn Beam, who joined the majority opinion, wrote separately “ to reiterate that we are not ruling on state funds but American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funds … The ARPA funds were given to the state to be used in four possible ways, three of which were directly related to the COVID -19 health emergency and one of which was to make necessary investments in , sewer or broadband infrastructure.”

Granted, many public school advocates lamented the , pointing out that federal funds are indeed public or taxpayer money and those federal funds could have been used to help struggling public schools.

Advertisement

Two justices – James Kitchens and Leslie King, both of the Central District, agreed with that argument.

But, importantly, a decidedly conservative-leaning Mississippi Supreme Court stopped far short – at least for the time being – of circumventing state constitutional language that plainly states that public funds are not to go to private schools.

And a decidedly conservative Mississippi Legislature chose not to expand voucher programs during the 2024 session.

This article first appeared on Mississippi Today and is republished here under a Creative Commons license.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Mississippi Today

On this day in 1925

Published

on

MAY 19, 1925

In this 1963 , leader Malcolm X speaks to reporters in Washington. Credit: Associated Press

Malcolm X was born Malcolm Little in Omaha, Nebraska. When he was 14, a teacher asked him what he wanted to be when he grew up and he answered that he wanted to be a lawyer. The teacher chided him, urging him to be realistic. “Why don't you plan on carpentry?”

In prison, he became a follower of Nation of Islam leader Elijah Muhammad. In his speeches, Malcolm X warned Black Americans against self-loathing: “Who taught you to hate the texture of your hair? Who taught you to hate the color of your skin? Who taught you to hate the shape of your nose and the shape of your lips? Who taught you to hate yourself from the top of your head to the soles of your feet? Who taught you to hate your own kind?”

Prior to a 1964 pilgrimage to Mecca, he split with Elijah Muhammad. As a result of that , Malcolm X began to accept followers of all races. In 1965, he was assassinated. Denzel Washington was nominated for an Oscar for his portrayal of the civil rights leader in Spike Lee's 1992 award-winning film.

This article first appeared on Mississippi Today and is republished here under a Creative Commons license.

Did you miss our previous article…
https://www.biloxinewsevents.com/?p=359877

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Mississippi Today

On this day in 1896

Published

on

MAY 18, 1896

The ruled 7-1 in Plessy v. Ferguson that racial segregation on railroads or similar public places was constitutional, forging the “separate but equal” doctrine that remained in place until 1954.

In his dissent that would foreshadow the ruling six decades later in Brown v. Board of Education, Justice John Marshall Harlan wrote that “separate but equal” rail cars were aimed at discriminating against Black Americans.

“In the view of the Constitution, in the eye of the , there is in this country no superior, dominant, ruling class of citizens,” he wrote. “Our Constitution in color-blind and neither knows nor tolerates classes among citizens. In respect of , all citizens are equal before the law. The humblest is the peer of the most powerful. The law … takes no account of his surroundings or of his color when his civil rights as guaranteed by the supreme law of the are involved.”

This article first appeared on Mississippi Today and is republished here under a Creative Commons license.

Did you miss our previous article…
https://www.biloxinewsevents.com/?p=359301

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News from the South

Trending