Connect with us

The Center Square

How Gov. Tate Reeves’ Approval Compares to the Nation’s Most Popular Governors | Mississippi

Published

on

www.thecentersquare.com – By Samuel Stebbins, 24/7 Wall St. via The Center Square – 2023-06-28 12:54:27

The specific duties of elected officials vary considerably from one branch of government to the next and between the different levels of government. But one common responsibility shared by virtually all those in elected office is to balance the interests, values, and priorities of their constituents. This is no easy task, particularly for those in powerful, high-profile positions who represent hundreds of thousands if not millions of Americans.

Consider, for example, the U.S. president. Subject to the individual judgements of over 250 million voting-age Americans, most presidents in recent decades have had approval ratings below 50%. According to Gallup survey data, George H.W. Bush is the only president since the Kennedy assassination with an average approval rating above 60% – and even he was voted out of office after a single term. (Here is a look at the most – and least – effective presidents in U.S. history.)

Like the president, each of the 50 sitting U.S. governors has the role of a chief executive. And as the highest-ranking and highest-profile elected official in state government, governors are also subject to constant public scrutiny. And some appear to be doing a better job than others.

Based on 2023 survey data, Mississippi Gov. Tate Reeves has an approval rating of 48% and a disapproval rating of 42%. Based on these figures, Reeves ranks as the fourth least popular state governor in the country.

Reeves, a Republican, took office in 2020 and is currently serving his first term as governor.

All data in this story is from Morning Consult, a public opinion data research company. Governors were ranked by their approval rating. Ties were broken by disapproval ratings, and in the case when governors shared the same approval and disapproval rating, the governor with the largest survey sample size ranked higher.

 

Rank Governor State Approval rating (%) Dissaproval rating (%) In office since Party
1 Phil Scott Vermont 78 14 2017 Republican
2 Mark Gordon Wyoming 67 24 2019 Republican
3 Chris Sununu New Hampshire 66 29 2017 Republican
4 Jim Justice West Virginia 66 31 2017 Republican
5 Andy Beshear Kentucky 63 32 2019 Democratic
6 Josh Green Hawaii 62 22 2022 Democratic
7 Sarah Huckabee Sanders Arkansas 61 27 2023 Republican
8 Kay Ivey Alabama 61 33 2017 Republican
9 Ned Lamont Connecticut 61 34 2019 Democratic
10 Kristi Noem South Dakota 61 37 2019 Republican
11 Brian Kemp Georgia 60 33 2019 Republican
12 Brad Little Idaho 60 33 2019 Republican
13 Bill Lee Tennessee 59 31 2019 Republican
14 John Carney Delaware 58 31 2017 Democratic
15 Greg Gianforte Montana 58 33 2021 Republican
16 Laura Kelly Kansas 58 34 2019 Democratic
17 Jared Polis Colorado 58 35 2019 Democratic
18 Janet Mills Maine 57 40 2019 Democratic
19 Doug Burgum North Dakota 56 26 2016 Republican
20 Glenn Youngkin Virginia 56 32 2022 Republican
21 Mike DeWine Ohio 56 37 2019 Republican
22 Ron DeSantis Florida 56 38 2019 Republican
23 Gavin Newsom California 56 38 2019 Democratic
24 Gretchen Whitmer Michigan 56 40 2019 Democratic
25 Wes Moore Maryland 55 16 2023 Democratic
26 Maura Healey Massachusetts 55 21 2023 Democratic
27 Kim Reynolds Iowa 55 39 2017 Republican
28 Spencer Cox Utah 54 30 2021 Republican
29 Henry McMaster South Carolina 54 36 2017 Republican
30 Tim Walz Minnesota 54 41 2019 Democratic
31 Josh Shapiro Pennsylvania 53 26 2023 Democratic
32 Eric Holcomb Indiana 53 34 2017 Republican
33 Mike Parson Missouri 53 34 2018 Republican
34 Michael Dunleavy Alaska 53 35 2018 Republican
35 Philip Murphy New Jersey 53 39 2018 Democratic
36 Roy Cooper III North Carolina 52 37 2017 Democratic
37 Gregory Abbott Texas 52 43 2015 Republican
38 JB Pritzker Illinois 52 43 2019 Democratic
39 Tony Evers Wisconsin 52 43 2019 Democratic
40 Kathy Hochul New York 51 41 2021 Democratic
41 John Bel Edwards Louisiana 51 41 2016 Democratic
42 Kevin Stitt Oklahoma 51 42 2019 Republican
43 Jay Inslee Washington 51 43 2013 Democratic
44 Michelle Lujan Grisham New Mexico 51 43 2019 Democratic
45 Dan McKee Rhode Island 50 37 2021 Democratic
46 Joseph Lombardo Nevada 49 25 2023 Republican
47 Tate Reeves Mississippi 48 42 2020 Republican
48 Katie Hobbs Arizona 47 36 2023 Democratic
49 Jim Pillen Nebraska 45 30 2023 Republican
50 Tina Kotek Oregon 42 39 2023 Democratic

 

Read More

The post How Gov. Tate Reeves’ Approval Compares to the Nation’s Most Popular Governors | Mississippi appeared first on www.thecentersquare.com

News from the South - Louisiana News Feed

Op-Ed: First do no harm begins with our diet | Opinion

Published

on

www.thecentersquare.com – By Louisiana Surgeon General Ralph Abraham – (The Center Square – ) 2025-04-30 17:37:00

The Make America Healthy Again movement has gained significant attention throughout the nation and many of the top initiatives highlighted have found their way into state legislatures this session.

Louisiana is no exception and Senator Patrick McMath, R-Covington, has, via Senate Bill 14, proposed a significant cleanup of our food supply, especially focused on kids. Backed by the popular support of the MAHA Moms, this bill has three major parts that are worth examining separately for their merits.

First is a ban of several “ultra processed” foods in school meals. In this case the term ultra processed is defined as products that contain any one of 13 specifically referenced compounds. Of these the first 7 are artificial dyes, like red dye No. 40, derived from petroleum byproducts that serve a singular role to make food more visually appealing.

We should all be asking ourselves why we ever allowed this stuff to find its way into our food in the first place. Several of these synthetic dyes have been shown to be associated with various harms ranging from ADHD to allergies and tumors.

Most of the other compounds on the list sound like they should have a skull and cross bones on the label. Take the bread additive azodicarbonamide as an example. If you thought that sounded like something you should not eat, you would be right.

It breaks down into urethane (yes, like the paint), a known carcinogen, and is banned is just about every country but the U.S.

In the case of school lunches, the child has no choice in the matter. They eat what they are provided and we have an obligation to protect them from toxic substances in the cafeteria.

Second is a labeling requirement for foods containing the substances in the school lunch ban portion, plus a few more, known to have a questionable safety profile that are banned in other countries.

It directs manufacturers to place a label on any food or drink containing these chemicals that clearly alerts the consumer of the fact that it contains something that is banned in other countries.

Last, but certainly not least, is a provision to reform of the Supplemental Nutritional Aid Program, once known as food stamps. This program is federally sponsored, and provides food assistance to families with an income below 130% of the federal poverty line. This would be about $31,200 net yearly income for a family of four.

In our inflationary economic environment, every penny counts and when it comes to food and obtaining the maximum calories for minimum dollars is a necessity. Historically, the cheapest foods happen to also be the least healthy in many cases, condemning those dependent on the program to poor health.

Soft drinks containing very high sugar or sugar substitutes are a major contributor to the chronic diseases that plague our health system like obesity and diabetes, especially in children. This bill directs DCFS to seek a waiver from the federal government allowing Louisiana to prohibit use of SNAP to purchase soft drinks.

Ultimately, the federal government should go a step further and incentivize healthier alternatives for SNAP beneficiaries, but this bill represents a major step in the right direction that can be accomplished at the state level.

The old saying goes: “You are what you eat.” We should keep this literal and obvious truth in mind when we think about how to turn the tide on chronic disease in our nation.

Let us begin by protecting the children who are too young to choose for themselves and providing better information for adults who can. SB 14 will accomplish both goals and move Louisiana to the forefront of the movement to Make America Healthy Again.

Dr. Ralph L. Abraham, M.D. is the  Louisiana Surgeon General

The post Op-Ed: First do no harm begins with our diet | Opinion appeared first on www.thecentersquare.com



Note: The following A.I. based commentary is not part of the original article, reproduced above, but is offered in the hopes that it will promote greater media literacy and critical thinking, by making any potential bias more visible to the reader –Staff Editor.



Note: The following A.I. based commentary is not part of the original article, reproduced above, but is offered in the hopes that it will promote greater media literacy and critical thinking, by making any potential bias more visible to the reader –Staff Editor.

Political Bias Rating: Center-Left

The article presents a clear ideological stance that aligns with health-conscious, regulatory-focused policy perspectives often associated with center-left viewpoints. It advocates for government intervention to regulate food safety, particularly in school meals and assistance programs like SNAP, emphasizing protection of public health and vulnerable populations such as children and low-income families. The tone is supportive of regulations to restrict harmful substances and promote healthier choices, which suggests a bias favoring increased oversight and reform in food policies rather than a neutral, detached report.

Continue Reading

The Center Square

Newsom parole board approves release of another toddler murderer | California

Published

on

www.thecentersquare.com – Kenneth Schrupp – (The Center Square – ) 2025-04-30 17:30:00

(The Center Square) – California Board of Parole Hearings ordered the release of convicted child murderer Herbert David Brown III, making this the second announced early release of a convicted child murderer in recent weeks.

San Luis Obispo County District Attorney Dan Dow, whose office convicted Brown for beating his 22-month-old daughter Lily to death, has requested that California Gov. Gavin Newsom use his authority to overturn the parole board’s decision. All current board members are Newsom appointees.

“Brown has done self-help programming but didn’t express responsibility for Lily’s death until Inmate Brown was told that failure to do so was a bar to being paroled,” wrote Dow. “Even then, Inmate Brown’s account lacked credibility.”

“Brown has significant mental health issues that appear to require ongoing monitoring and treatment,” continued Dow. “Inmate Brown’s relapse prevention plans are inadequate and superficial.”

Brown entered a plea of no contest and was sentenced to 15 years to life in prison for the murder. Lily was found dead with multiple injuries, including a fractured skull.

Brown was under the influence of methamphetamine when he killed his daughter. He now identifies as a woman and has served 12 years of his sentence.  

According to the most recent Comprehensive Risk Assessment on Brown from 2023, he was found to be a “higher moderate” risk for violence. 

Brown was first granted parole in October 2024, after which California Gov. Gavin Newsom, who has appointed all current members of the California Board of Parole Hearings, referred the parole decision back to the parole board for review. The board has since reaffirmed its earlier decision, and Dow is seeking residents to write to the governor to use his constitutional authority to override the parole board.

“Precious Lily deserves better. The time is now Governor Newsom, please help ensure that we have Justice for Lily Brown,” said Dow.

“The Governor has authority under California Constitution, Article V, Section 8(b) to reverse a decision to release a convicted murderer on parole, but must do so within 30 calendar days,” continued Dow. “The decision was issued on April 22, 2025.”

There is currently no release date set for Brown.

Two weeks ago, the Board of Parole Hearings’ decision to approve the early release of convicted child murderer Josue Herrera, who was found to have beaten his girlfriend’s 2-year-old son to death, sparked national outrage against the state’s apparent leniency toward murders of young children. 

Dow said Brown’s early release is possible due to Proposition 57, passed in 2016. 

Prop. 57 was written to only allow early release of “prisoners convicted of non-violent felonies.” 

However, because the state automatically classifies any crimes not specifically classified as violent to be non-violent, such as drive-by shootings and assault with a deadly weapon, many violent crimes are not technically considered “violent” per se.

Dow also noted Prop. 57 allows the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation to award sentence credits for rehabilitation, good behavior or educational achievements, even to those who committed crimes classified as violent.

“This means that even those inmates sentenced for violent offenses, like murder of a child, are eligible to be released much earlier than under the law that was in effect prior to the passage of Proposition 57,” said Dow.

The post Newsom parole board approves release of another toddler murderer | California appeared first on www.thecentersquare.com



Note: The following A.I. based commentary is not part of the original article, reproduced above, but is offered in the hopes that it will promote greater media literacy and critical thinking, by making any potential bias more visible to the reader –Staff Editor.

Political Bias Rating: Right-Leaning

This article presents a narrative that is critical of the California Board of Parole Hearings and Governor Gavin Newsom’s appointments, focusing on the early release of convicted child murderers. The tone and framing emphasize public safety concerns and criticize the perceived leniency of the parole system under progressive policies like Proposition 57. The language used highlights the gravity of the crimes and frames the parole decisions as contentious and problematic, which aligns with a right-leaning viewpoint commonly skeptical of criminal justice reforms associated with more liberal or progressive politics. While the article reports facts, the selection and emphasis on these facts, and the inclusion of the District Attorney’s plea for the governor to intervene, reveal a conservative-leaning perspective.

Continue Reading

The Center Square

Trump softens tariffs for U.S. automakers through complex rules | National

Published

on

www.thecentersquare.com – Brett Rowland – (The Center Square – ) 2025-04-30 15:45:00

(The Center Square) – President Donald Trump took measures to lessen the impact of tariffs on U.S. automakers, but vehicle prices are expected to increase. 

“We just wanted to help them during this little transition, short term,” Trump said. “We didn’t want to penalize them.”

The 25% tariff on imported cars remains, and a new 25% tariff on auto parts will go into effect May 3. But Trump’s latest executive order allows reimbursements for U.S. producers importing car parts, which will be subject to 25% tariffs starting May 3. The maximum reimbursement will be 3.75% of the value of domestically produced cars. The cap falls to 2.5% for the second year and is phased out entirely after that.

Trump’s executive order also means that automakers that pay tariffs on imported cars won’t be required to pay other import duties, such as those on steel and aluminum.

“They all want to come back to Michigan and build cars again. You know why? Because of our tax and tariff policy,” Trump said Tuesday during his rally in Michigan. “We’re giving them a little time before we slaughter them if they don’t do this.”

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said the goal was to get automakers to create more U.S. jobs.

“President Trump has had meetings with both domestic and foreign auto producers, and he’s committed to bringing back auto production to the U.S.,” Bessent said. “So we want to give the automakers a path to do that, quickly, efficiently and create as many jobs as possible.”

Still, vehicle prices are expected to increase as tariffs reshape the market.

Cox Automotive Chief Economist Jonathan Smoke said “uncertainty remains acute, especially regarding what will happen with the tariffs.” 

“Supply has since tightened and prices have moved higher,” he said. “With higher prices, urgency has diminished.”

Smoke said the next two months could set the stage for the rest of the year. 

“Instead of putting China first, I’m putting Michigan first and I’m putting America first,” Trump said at the Macomb County Rally.

Even before Trump’s auto tariffs, cars were too expensive for many Americans. The average price of a new vehicle in the U.S. is above $48,000, according to Cox Automotive. Real median household income was $80,610 in 2023, according to the U.S. Census Bureau. However, more than 40% of new-vehicle sales by volume in 2024 were priced below $40,000.

The post Trump softens tariffs for U.S. automakers through complex rules | National appeared first on www.thecentersquare.com



Note: The following A.I. based commentary is not part of the original article, reproduced above, but is offered in the hopes that it will promote greater media literacy and critical thinking, by making any potential bias more visible to the reader –Staff Editor.

Political Bias Rating: Center-Right

The article predominantly reports on actions taken by President Donald Trump regarding tariffs on U.S. automakers with largely neutral language, including direct quotes from Trump and officials, as well as commentary from a chief economist. However, the framing subtly aligns with a center-right perspective by emphasizing Trump’s economic policies favoring U.S. industry and job creation, and by using language that reflects his own nationalist and protectionist rhetoric (“putting Michigan first and I’m putting America first”). The article presents these policies without overt criticism, thus reflecting a viewpoint sympathetic to the administration’s economic nationalism rather than a strictly neutral or critical stance. This suggests a center-right bias, leaning towards support for Trump’s economic agenda.

Continue Reading

Trending