Today, after months of campaigning on “giving education back to the states,” President Donald Trump signed an executive order that aims to totally dismantle the U.S. Department of Education.

There are serious questions of constitutionality that will need to be worked out in the courts, and Congress likely needs to sign off on the elimination of a federal agency. Who knows if this, like so much of what Trump and Elon Musk have been cutting, will actually go through. 

Nonetheless, Trump kept another major campaign promise — one that was directly forecasted in the Project 2025 manifesto that Trump’s top advisers helped write. Congratulations to you, I suppose, if you think this is a good idea.

My plea to you now: Play this out a little further and consider the critical, unanswered questions about what this is going to mean for states like Mississippi.

Let’s acknowledge this frankly: Our track record running our own public education system is god-awful. Last time Mississippi managed its own schools system without the federal agency in place, it was failing dramatically:

• Educational standards set by state leaders were woefully low. How low? Routinely, the Mississippians lucky enough to earn high school diplomas were illiterate when they entered the workforce. That low.
• Schoolhouses were falling in and barely usable, hungry kids were too ill to return to class, and special education programs for our most vulnerable students literally did not exist.
• Traditionally overlooked communities were wildly undereducated, with fewer than half of rural Mississippians and fewer than half of Black Mississippians holding high school diplomas.
• The political power structure set or influenced state’s curricula. Just one example of how this played out: In America’s Blackest state and the heart of the civil rights movement, public school students were only taught one white version of history. Can we really feel OK about that?

In so many ways, the founding of the U.S. Department of Education in 1979 created transformational guardrails for Mississippi that curtailed most of these travesties. Yes, we implemented our own changes at the state level, and yes, nothing is perfect now. But without the critical framework of the federal agency and its funding prowess, we never would have taken those steps. For decades now, only because of the federal agency, we have been assured that:

• Poor, rural school districts would get the funds they needed — funds they weren’t getting from legislative leaders of America’s poorest state.
• Critical special education — programs that did not exist because they were not being funded by Mississippi — would be funded with that money being distributed equitably.
• Annual standardized testing would show us whether we were ahead of, on par with, or falling behind the performance of students in other states. You remember the “Mississippi miracle,” the dramatic reading improvements that were a key point of pride for virtually every 2023 political campaign? We literally wouldn’t know the miracle existed without this critical federal benchmarking.
• Adequate funds would be distributed to ensure that students of marginalized communities — minorities, migrants, students with disabilities, students experiencing homelessness — got the extra support they needed to succeed, and the white political power structure wouldn’t focus only on students who looked like them.

Look, we have the right to know that our tax dollars are being spent efficiently and appropriately. Looking under the hood is indeed desperately needed across government at every level.

And truly, what better way to spend those dollars than on the education of our children? In so many ways, our state’s future hinges more on this basic function of government than any other spending. Do you want a stronger economy? More jobs and better jobs? Vibrant and well-run towns and cities? Functioning health care and economic systems? There’s no room for debate: All of that starts with providing our children with a quality education.

So call me cynical, liberal or just plain crazy, but as we’re staring down the barrel of one of the most dramatic public policy shifts in American history with this latest move by the White House, we need to get so many questions answered, or Mississippi could be set so far back in time that we’ll never recover. Our kids’ livelihoods are on the line here, and our collective success as a state is at stake.

Here are a few of those critical questions that come to mind.

Can Mississippi really manage up to $1.5 billion in federal funds on our own?

Mississippi, the state that relies more on the federal dollar than any other state, right now ranks 45th in the nation in public education funding. That’s already far too low.

But included in that total is $1.5 billion that the U.S. Department of Education sends Mississippi each year. If you’re counting at home, that represents 30% of the state’s annual spending on public education. That money is split up into grants and other specifically designated programs, so the state has little leeway in deciding how it can be spent. 

Trump and his administration have given virtually no specifics of how this post-DOE iteration of things will work — an extremely concerning reality in itself — but experts suggest that instead of funds being sent to states through the federal agency, Congress would send that money directly to the state in the form of block grants — or grants that have some general parameters on how they can be spent but fewer strings attached by way of accountability. One would assume that the Mississippi  Departments of Education would take on the responsibility of doling this funding out.

This is where Mississippi’s education structure comes into play. Our state Department of Education is run by the Board of Education, a nine-member political board appointed by the governor, lieutenant governor and the speaker of the House. If these Trump-decreed changes go into effect, these nine people seemingly will, overnight, have a $1.5 billion weight on their shoulders.

We have every right to be concerned that these board members would act as if they were beholden to the politicians who appointed them — a long-standing reality across our state government system that has harmed Mississippians in just so many ways. The potential for corruption and misspending here is immense. (In case you’re wondering about Mississippi’s recent track record on doling out federal block grant funding, ask the handful of people who are awaiting federal sentencing in the state’s welfare embezzlement how they’re doing lately.)

A few more money-related questions that no one seems to be asking: How often will the feds send us this money — monthly, quarterly, annually in one lump sum? How quickly might it then make its way to school districts that desperately need it to provide these critical educational services? Who is watching our leaders to ensure the money is being spent how Congress dictates and how Mississippians need? Will Congress or our state Legislature create some sort of guardrails to ensure misspending doesn’t become commonplace? Without federal lobbying that happens on behalf of the U.S. Department of Education each year, will Congress appropriate the same amount of funding for Mississippi? Will anyone in the Mississippi power structure stand up if political influence of this spending becomes a problem?

Can Mississippi really be trusted to spend federal funds appropriately?

Yes, the U.S. Department of Education controls so much of how the federal funding gets spent. Again, in so many cases, that is a necessary and good thing, especially considering Mississippi’s problematic record spending federal dollars effectively.

Here’s just a sampling of what Mississippi receives from the U.S. Department of Education in fiscal year 2024, according to a Legislative Budget Office report that was requested by state Rep. Daryl Porter and shared with Mississippi Today:

• $236 million for Title I grants aimed at improving academic achievement and providing a high-quality education to students from low-income families. 

In the 2021-22 school year, 737 of 1,040 schools in Mississippi were eligible for Title I funds. What could go wrong in Mississippi, the state home to the very most children living in poverty, without this funding?

• $134 million for special education grants — the vast majority of the state’s overall special education program spending. 

Last year, the federal government deemed Mississippi in need of consecutive years of assistance to meet the goals of the Individuals with Disabilities Education (IDEA) Act, which was passed to create better outcomes and opportunities for people with disabilities.

• $56 million to provide vocational services for individuals with disabilities so that they may prepare for and engage in competitive integrated employment or supported employment and achieve economic self-sufficiency.

Again, an area of need in Mississippi that could not be met in any other way than through federal education grants.

• $29 million for Effective Instruction State Grants, which aim to reform teacher and principal certification programs, provide support and professional development for teachers and principals. Other aims of this grant include recruiting and retaining effective teachers and principals, providing professional development for teachers and principals, and reducing class size. 

Our state, which has for years been dealing with a critical teacher shortage, has one of the lowest average teacher salaries in the nation. These certification programs provide salary increases to teachers and better prepare them for the challenges they face in the classroom. God knows what it would mean for them if federal assistance disappeared.

• $10 million for 21st Century Community Learning Centers, which serves as the only federal funding source dedicated exclusively to afterschool programs.

Getting kids into afterschool programs not only increases their ability to succeed in the classroom, it keeps them entertained and deters them from committing crime.

So, a few more questions: Will anyone — Congress, the state Legislature, the governor, anyone — closely monitor how our Board of Education will spend these important federal funds? Can we trust Mississippi officials to treat every Mississippi child equally in funding schools and education programs? Can we continue our special education programs? Can we sustain support for rural districts and special education? Can we fully support our teachers?

As you can see, there are endless questions and few answers. A concerning reality is that no one, seemingly, has these answers. Perhaps the most concerning reality is no one in Mississippi leadership has tried to find the answers.

We’ve known for months that this was Trump’s play. He’s promised it. Yet to date, the Mississippi Board of Education has not publicly discussed any of this in a public meeting. The state Legislature, too busy fighting over cutting state revenue and spending, has not debated the federal education cut publicly. Congress has obviously not vetted this at all, and the federal courts have yet to weigh in. 

As is the case with so many other things that Trump has done in the past two months, we don’t know what’s happening. That is by design.

But we Mississippians better figure it out. Because of our past failures, the burden on us here is heavier than in most places. The future of Mississippi is on the line here, and we must get this right — and quickly.

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

by Geoff Pender, Taylor Vance and Michael Goldberg, Mississippi Today
March 20, 2025

Mississippi Senate leaders have said a House plan to eliminate the state income tax over about a decade was foolhardy, and instead proposed a much longer, more cautious approach.

But the Senate had a few typos in the bill — errant decimal points — that instead of drawing out the phase out of the income tax would speed it up, nearly as fast as the House proposal, multiple lawmakers confirmed to Mississippi Today.

The House ran with it. It realized the Senate’s error and passed the measure on Thursday.

Now, if the House leadership wanted, it could send the measure to Gov. Tate Reeves, who could sign it into law. The measure was held on a procedural motion that could allow the House to reconsider and continue negotiations.

Legislative leaders and Gov. Tate Reeves went radio silent after the House unexpectedly concurred with the Senate proposal on Thursday morning. Early Thursday afternoon, House and Senate leaders were meeting behind closed doors, and many lawmakers had no idea about the snafu.

Later Thursday afternoon, Reeves posted on social media that he was looking forward to receiving the bill on Friday and signing it into law and, “Today is a day for celebration!”

Hosemann and White’s offices on Thursday afternoon did not immediately respond to a request for comments about the situation.

The intent of the Senate’s “cautious” plan to eliminate the state individual income tax over many years would only eliminate it if economic growth “triggers” were met. After an initial four-year reduction in the income tax rate, the triggered phase out would require revenue growth to far outpace spending.

READ MORE: House votes to send Senate income tax elimination plan to governor. But is debate really over?

But instead of saying revenue growth over spending reached 85% of the cost of a drop in income tax, the bill accidentally said .85%. This means a very small amount of growth would trigger large income tax cuts, eliminating it far quicker than the Senate had wanted. Similar typos were in other metrics of the trigger language.

Jared Walczak, Vice President of State Projects at the Tax Foundation, said the error could have harmful consequences for Mississippi’s economy.

“If implemented as-is, the law could trigger tax cuts when Mississippi can’t afford them,” Walczak wrote in a social media post. “Twenty-eight states have cut (personal income tax) rates since 2021, including Mississippi. They’ve mostly done so responsibly. With this drafting error, the Mississippi legislation would break from that pattern of responsible tax relief and could put the state in a very rough spot.”

It’s unclear whether the House would really send a bill with obvious unintentional flaws — dealing with a major overhaul in the state’s taxation — to the governor.

Another bill remains alive — the one with the House’s most recent counter offer — before the Senate.

Lawmakers could reconsider passage of the bill with typos, or let it die, and hold more negotiations between the House and Senate. Or, both chambers could unanimously agree to fix the typos and send what the Senate originally intended to the governor.

Or, the largest tax cut in Mississippi history, coupled with one of the largest (gasoline) tax increases, could become the law of the land because of a few typos. If it did become law, lawmakers could come back sometime in the next four years before the growth triggers take effect and change them.

In Reeves’ social media post he said: “I hear there are those who desire future tweaks to this law, and those can certainly be considered in future legislation.” He thanked White and House Ways and Means Chairman Trey Lamar.

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

The mayoral candidates at the forum agreed: Poverty in Jackson is a reflection of how the government distributes its resources. 

Where they differed, however, was over where those resources should be targeted, if the city or state government is more responsible, and whether the current mayor, Chokwe Antar Lumumba, has been doing enough to create economic opportunity in the city. 

At the Mississippi Poor People’s Campaign forum on Wednesday night, poverty was the first of several topics discussed, including water, public safety, affordable housing and empowering the city’s youth. 

Six democratic mayoral candidates, who will face off in the April 1 primary against six others who did not attend, were asked about their specific plan to eradicate poverty in Jackson. They answered from left to right in the order in which they were seated, and their answers are listed here in that order. 

The first to go, Marcus Wallace, a former mayor of Edwards, focused on what the city of Jackson could be doing to invest its $334 million budget in local businesses. Owner of a local construction firm, Wallace said he has been contracting with the city for 27 years, and it hurts him to see out-of-town companies taking work that could be done by Jacksonians. 

“We should do a better job in the city of protecting and preserving our businesses,” he said. 

Likewise, businesses should be incentivized to create more jobs in Jackson, said candidate Tim Henderson, a retired air force lieutenant colonel and U.S. Space Force consultant. He also advocated for raising the city’s minimum wage to $20 an hour. 

“We’ve gotta create those economic opportunities in south Jackson, as well west Jackson and northwest Jackson to give people an opportunity to make their money at home and not spend all their money traveling to Madison, Flowood and the other surrounding areas,” Henderson said.

Lumumba said that every city talks about incentivizing business, but he questioned whether businesses have the same care for the city, referencing the departure of Walmart-owned wholesale chain Sam’s Club.

“When Sam’s was in Jackson, they did very well,” he said. “The unfortunate thing was that they didn’t have value in our community, and they assumed when they moved to Madison that you would follow.” 

The city can also use revolving loan programs to invest in areas that banks won’t, he added. 

“The Fondrens, Belhavens and downtowns of the city of Jackson are considered ‘investor ready,’” he said. “It’s our communities that are often left in the fray.” 

Candidate Socrates Garrett, a longtime city and state contractor, spoke from experience when he said it is hard to build a business as an African American in the poorest city in the poorest state in the nation, even though a majority of Jacksonians are African American.

“If I was in Seattle, or if I was in Maryland, the whole opportunity would be tremendously different,” he said. “But in Jackson, Mississippi, it is twice as difficult, even though we are the majority in this city, and we’ve got to figure out why that is.” 

(Jackson is not the poorest city in the state by every metric, but its median household income of about $42,000 – which falls under a living wage – is lower than that of the state’s at $54,000.) 

“We don’t have an economy of Jackson, that’s the problem,” Garrett said. 

But the mayor can work to fix that, Garrett continued, by using his power to award city contracts to local minority-owned businesses. And Lumumba, he said, was not doing that enough. 

“Any contract under $50,000, this city has the ability to pick up the telephone and call three businesses of their choice,” Garrett said. “Without a bid, without anything other than just pick up the phone and call, and yet I don’t see no minority businesses.” 

The city can fund minority businesses even with a request-for-proposal process, he added. 

“It’s a puny contest. You choose who you want to do that work, and the mayor let folks get in his ears, started giving away the power of that office when he started going through his blind process,” Garrett said, referencing the city’s practice of scoring contract proposals without the names of the vendors attached. “We need a mayor that has his foot on what’s going on in Jackson and make sure that our people are working and that these contracts are benefitting them. Under my leadership, we will build and create our own economy with the dollars that we have.” 

In fact, much of Lumumba’s second term has been dominated by a battle with the city council over replacing the white-owned corporate behemoth Waste Management, who had long held the city’s garbage collection contract, with Richard’s Disposal, the Louisiana-based, minority-owned firm Lumumba’s staff selected. 

The mayor eventually prevailed with Richard’s Disposal receiving a 6-year, $64 million contract in 2024, Clarion Ledger reported.

Delano Funches, a personal injury attorney, talked about the power the federal government has to address poverty when he said Jackson should work with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development to create more affordable housing.

In contrast, David Archie, former Hinds County supervisor, mostly focused on the role of the state. He asked if everyone in the room understood that while Jackson is a Democratic city, the state is run by Republicans.

“With the biggest bank of free money that goes all over this state other than to Jackson, Mississippi,” he said. “That’s the first thing that you got to understand.” 

Number two, Archie said, is that the jobs are in Jackson, but the congestion on I-55 in the mornings and evenings is proof that Jackson’s jobs are not going to Jacksonians. 

“They come to Jackson to drain us every day like a vacuum cleaner, and nobody is saying anything about it,” he said.

On rebuttal, Lumumba got a chance to respond to Garrett. He reminded the audience that the biggest contract in this city does, in fact, go to a minority business — Richard’s Disposal. 

But Richard’s Disposal winning the contract was not about enriching individuals, he said. 

“I don’t have anything against a minority business that wants to do well, but my goal isn’t to make you rich, my goal is to make wealth generate in the community, right, and those are the things that we have to stand on,” he said. 

Timing of the years-long garbage conflict, in which Lumumba made bribery allegations against council members, seems to coincide with the FBI’s corruption investigation and undercover sting operation in Jackson that ensnared former Ward 2 Councilwoman Angelique Lee, who pleaded guilty, as well as outgoing Ward 6 Councilman Aaron Banks and Lumumba, both of whom pleaded not guilty and are awaiting trial. 

“The reason we had to do a blind bidding process is people are more loyal to their political connections,” Lumumba said, “than to a process that gave legitimate opportunity.” 

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