While there does seem to be growing momentum for progress on Mississippi lawmakers taking up policies that could provide some financial stability for the state’s struggling hospitals, there are other difficult and expensive issues facing the 172 members of the Mississippi Legislature.
The legislative horizon reminds me in many ways of where we were in Mississippi about a decade ago in 2014. With pressure from Democratic colleagues, public health advocacy groups and most of the state’s hospitals growing for Medicaid expansion, then-House Appropriations Committee Chairman Herb Frierson (R-Poplarville), sent a letter to every college president, community college president, county and municipal school district superintendent and others in positions of leadership in public education from kindergarten to graduate school in Mississippi.
“I just wanted people who look to the Legislature for education funding to be armed with the facts about how the state’s budget pie gets divided and to know that Medicaid expansion isn’t something that can be done without consequences for every other function of state government,” Frierson said.
Frierson said the letter was in response to post-2013 regular session inquiries from education leaders about why education funding had not improved on pace with improvements in the state’s economy since the depths of the 2007 to 2009 Great Recession.
A decade later, Medicaid expansion, or some form of hospital-friendly legislative intervention, remains on the political table. Gov. Tate Reeves is offering a plan, but it will take legislative cooperation to succeed. But as usual, that political table is crowded.
The push and shove between Reeves and Democratic challenger Brandon Presley over Medicaid and rural hospitals will continue through election day, but with legislative majorities being what they are in both house Reeves has the best chance of legislative support.
Another critical issue facing Mississippi is the public pension funding challenge. Mississippi’s Public Employee Retirement System (PERS) is a system of retirement plans covering all public employees including public school teachers, the state Highway Safety Patrol, municipal employees and state legislators.
Revenue for the PERS system comes from three primary sources: investment income, employer contributions (paid by the taxpayers) and employee contributions (deducted from the pay of state employees participating in the PERS plans).
Right now, the retirement system has a $20.5 billion unfunded liability, meaning the contributions of state and municipal employees and income from the plan’s investments aren’t enough to cover present and future benefits for retirees. The system is funded to just under 61 percent.
PERS is expected to ask lawmakers for a direct cash infusion and present the Legislature a plan to stabilize the system that will include hikes in employer contributions from the present 17.4% to 22.4%. Employee contributions are presently 9% and could also rise.
The 5% employer contribution increase will reverberate throughout state and local government including the education community at every level, county and municipal governments and other public entities.
To listen to the TV ads in the gubernatorial campaign, Medicaid and the financial plight of the state’s hospitals are the top-shelf issues in the state. And for many Mississippians, that’s an accurate assessment.
But for its impact on the state budget and the budget of every governmental subdivision – counties, cities, educational institutions, etc. – the future of PERS will command equal if not greater prominence in the political arena.
The influence of inflation, rising interest rates and uncertainty in the housing market and auto manufacturing may impact Mississippi’s economy, which just last month hit a rare month performing under the state revenue estimate.
Education and public health care always dominate public spending in Mississippi, but in 2024 hospitals and PERS will impact what’s left for lawmakers to divide among all other segments of state government.
Sid Salter is a syndicated columnist. Contact him at sidsalter@sidsalter.com.
13 comments:
Democrats cause inflation then try to cash in on it. Let them squirm.
I'll vote for anyone who promises me more "free stuff."
8:32
Nice attempt at revisionist history. Two of the three COVID stimulus packages were under trump. Dollar wise, half came from the first two plans and half from the last plan. So republicans are equally responsible for inflation. Try thinking for yourself instead of automatically accepting whatever the cult tells you.
The present funding level of PERS represents the current value of investments compared to the present value of all future obligations for current employees and retirees. The funding level calculation does not consider future contributions from employees and employers nor does it consider future investment performance. This is the same as a person having $61,000 in available cash when the present value of all their debt is $100,000.
I see the portion of the Sun-n-Sand the State is salvaging is almost complete. The 172 legislators and their side chicks can go there and get this money issue settled there, just like the old days. Whiskey on me.
Democrats cause inflation then try to cash in on it. Let them squirm.
Will someone please tell me where any Democrat elected statewide office - made any decisions pertaining to Mississippi with Medicaid, PERS, and financing hospitals!? Because I thought for the last 20 years it was Haley Barbour, Phil Bryant, and Tate Reeves driving these policies for Mississippi?
Or are we just going to move the goalposts and place all these state issues at the feet of the Federal government?
9:37am
Medicaid is federal. The entire entitlement mentality is a national disease. To say inflation justifies a benefit to bureaucrats, derived from taxing producers, is Animsl Farm socialism enforced by armies of the national, DC based, commie ACLU.
Try thinking for yourself instead of automatically accepting whatever the cult tells you.
YYYYYYaaaawwwwwnnnnn, SSSnnooorrreeee, ZZZZzzzzZZZZzz
@9:37, don't hang the problem of PERS on the Republicans. Hold them accountable for not making the hard decisions to reform the state Ponzi, but the problems with PERS started well before Haley Barbour.
PERS- Public Employees Running Scared
The state should not default on its PRRS obligation. It is part of the compensation package for state employees. Think of it as if a private employer promised a 401(k) matching contribution, then took their contribution and related earnings back 20-30 years later. It’s the same concept. The problem is that the legislators never funded the plan adequately since the late 1990’s when they increased benefits.
Sid is wrong about Highway zpattolmen. They have their own separate retirement fund, though it is administered by PERS, just like SLRP. Oh, and the legislature has fully funded SLRP.
9:37 - The problem with your 'show me' statement is that it's not 'statewide elected officials' who make these decisions. It the entire body of our legislature.
My prediction…..they will simply kick the can down the road.
Post a Comment