Mississippi · individual fact

Mississippi health

Insurance coverage, personal healthcare spending, longevity, mortality, health risks, and provider shortages.

Uninsured rate · all ages9.7%2024 · #10 of 50 · highest first
Uninsured rate · under age 6511.7%2024 · #10 of 50 · highest first
Private coverage · under age 6564.9%2024 · #46 of 50 · highest first

Mississippi over time

Explore Mississippi readings, major events and reviewed actions on the same date scale. Mississippi officeholders appear in separate lanes. National event evidence describes national context; it does not measure a Mississippi effect.

Major events & context · A curated selection, including uncertain effects. Milestone dates do not establish that an event caused a Mississippi change.

Enacted / issuedDid not proceedPending / in progressStatus unclear

Colors show the latest recorded status. Passing one chamber is not enactment. A number groups actions with the same date, body and status.

Uninsured rate · all ages Mississippi · source units
MississippiPublished U.S. benchmark

Move across the chart to inspect the nearest observation. Click or tap to keep a reading selected, or focus the chart and use the arrow keys. Hover over or focus a marker to explore; click or tap to pin. Press Escape to clear.

Uninsured rate · all ages2024: 9.7%7.2%11.4%15.5%Mississippi, 2014: 14.5%Mississippi, 2015: 12.7%Mississippi, 2016: 11.8%Mississippi, 2017: 12%Mississippi, 2018: 12.1%Mississippi, 2019: 13%Mississippi, 2021: 11.9%Mississippi, 2022: 10.8%Mississippi, 2023: 10.3%Mississippi, 2024: 9.7%201420192024
✦ Major events & context · 21National context · Affordable Care Act signed · 2010-03-23ACA signedNational context · Supreme Court makes ACA Medicaid expansion optional for states · 2012-06-28Medicaid expansion rulingNational context · ACA Marketplace coverage and main Medicaid expansion begin · 2014-01-01ACA coverage beginsNational context · Opioid crisis declared a national public-health emergency · 2017-10-26Opioid emergencyNational context · COVID-19 characterized as a pandemic · 2020-03-11COVID-19 pandemicNational context · Pandemic Medicaid continuous-enrollment condition enacted · 2020-03-18Medicaid coverage protectionNational context · FDA authorizes the first COVID-19 vaccine for emergency use · 2020-12-11First COVID vaccine EUANational context · American Rescue Plan expands Marketplace premium assistance · 2021-03-11Marketplace aid expandedNational context · No Surprises Act billing protections begin · 2022-01-01Surprise-billing protectionsNational context · Supreme Court overturns Roe and Casey in Dobbs · 2022-06-24Dobbs abortion rulingNational context · 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline launches nationwide · 2022-07-16988 crisis line launchesNational context · Inflation Reduction Act signed · 2022-08-16Prescription-drug lawNational context · Medicare Part D insulin cost-sharing cap takes effect · 2023-01-01Part D insulin $35 capNational context · Medicaid coverage terminations can resume · 2023-04-01Medicaid terminations resumeNational context · Federal COVID-19 public-health emergency ends · 2023-05-11COVID health emergency endsNational context · Medicare Part D out-of-pocket cap begins · 2025-01-01Part D $2,000 cap (2025)National context · 2025 reconciliation law changes Medicaid and funds rural care · 2025-07-04Medicaid and rural-care lawNational context · Rural Health Transformation awards announced for all 50 states · 2025-12-29Rural health awardsNational context · Temporary enhanced Marketplace premium tax credits end · 2026-01-01Enhanced ACA credits endNational context · First negotiated Medicare drug prices take effect · 2026-01-01Negotiated drug prices beginNational context · CMS issues Medicaid community-engagement implementation rule · 2026-06-01Medicaid eligibility rule● Mississippi Legislature · 42● U.S. Congress · Mississippi delegation · 5◆ Governor · 2■ Mississippi agencies · 0No reviewed actions match these filters.2010-03-012026-06-30

11 of 11 reviewed Mississippi actions match · 10 date markers shown. 21 major events shown separately.

Mississippi · 2024: 9.7% · Rank #10 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: 8.2%

FactVote uses the Census Bureau's HIC-4_ACS historical table. Rates and 90% confidence margins of error are the published ACS 1-year estimates for the civilian noninstitutionalized population. ACS annual estimates, all ages. Standard ACS 2020 one-year data were not released; the chart leaves a gap. Survey ranks describe point estimates and do not establish significant differences. Annual observations use December 31; monthly observations use the first of the month. Lines connect consecutive readings and do not supply values between them. Missing observations break the lines.

View observations and export data
Mississippi Uninsured rate · all ages · source units
PeriodMississippiRankU.S. benchmark
20249.7%#10 of 508.2%
202310.3%#8 of 50Not available
202210.8%#8 of 50Not available
202111.9%#6 of 50Not available
2020Not availableUnavailableNot available
201913%#5 of 50Not available
201812.1%#6 of 50Not available
201712%#7 of 50Not available
201611.8%#6 of 50Not available
201512.7%#6 of 50Not available
201414.5%#8 of 50Not available
How major events are selected

The timeline combines the corresponding national fact’s reviewed event catalog, labeled National context, with individually reviewed state milestones. State events use primary sources and distinguish signing, effective and filing dates. Each milestone keeps its source-check date, geographical limits and evidence limits. This curated selection is not a complete history.

Date ranges affect events and actions. Action type, status and official-name search affect government records only. Events remain separate from action counts. An event after the latest observation extends context without creating a new reading.

Mississippi · state comparison

Who has health coverage?

Compare ACS annual estimates for all ages or people under 65. Coverage categories can overlap and do not sum to the insured share.

Mississippi · 20249.7%
Mississippi rank#10among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark8.2%Same measure and period when published

#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.

Uninsured rate · all ages

FactVote uses the Census Bureau's HIC-4_ACS historical table. Rates and 90% confidence margins of error are the published ACS 1-year estimates for the civilian noninstitutionalized population.

ACS annual estimates, all ages. Standard ACS 2020 one-year data were not released; the chart leaves a gap. Survey ranks describe point estimates and do not establish significant differences.

Hover to inspect. Click or tap to compare that period with every state. Focus the graph and use arrow keys, Home or End to select a period. Press Escape to return to the latest period.

Mississippi
Uninsured rate · all ages history in Mississippi7.3%11.4%15.4%20142024
2024 · Mississippi: 9.7% · Rank #10 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: 8.2% · Selected for state comparison
View history and select a period
Mississippi Uninsured rate · all ages history
PeriodMississippiCompare
201414.5%
201512.7%
201611.8%
201712%
201812.1%
201913%
2020Not available
202111.9%
202210.8%
202310.3%
20249.7%

Compare states on the graph

Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Mississippi stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.

Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. Mississippi has a dark outline.

Lower value · 2.8%Higher value · 16.7%Striped: unavailable

Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.

Mississippi · 9.7%2024 · Rank #10 of 50, highest firstSelected state

50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.

Compare Mississippi with every state · 50 ranked
Uninsured rate · all ages · 2024 · highest value ranked #1
RankStateValueComparison notes
#1Texas16.7%—
#2Georgia12%—
#3Oklahoma11.5%—
#4Nevada11.4%—
#5Alaska11%—
#6Florida10.9%—
#7Arizona10.3%—
#7Wyoming10.3%—
#9New Mexico10.1%—
#10Mississippi · your comparison9.7%—
#10Tennessee9.7%—
#12Arkansas9.4%—
#13Idaho9.2%—
#14South Carolina9%—
#15Montana8.8%—
#16North Carolina8.6%—
#17Kansas8.5%—
#18Utah8.3%—
#19Alabama8.2%—
#20South Dakota8.1%—
#21Colorado7.9%—
#22Louisiana7.7%—
#22Missouri7.7%—
#22New Jersey7.7%—
#25Indiana7.5%—
#26Nebraska7.1%—
#27Delaware6.9%—
#27Illinois6.9%—
#27Virginia6.9%—
#30Kentucky6.8%—
#31Ohio6.7%—
#32Washington6.5%—
#33Maryland6.3%—
#34North Dakota6.1%—
#35California5.9%—
#36Connecticut5.8%—
#36Pennsylvania5.8%—
#36West Virginia5.8%—
#39Maine5.5%—
#40Iowa5.4%—
#41Wisconsin5.3%—
#42Oregon5.2%—
#43Michigan5.1%—
#43Minnesota5.1%—
#45New York5%—
#46Rhode Island4.6%—
#47New Hampshire4.5%—
#48Vermont4.2%—
#49Hawaii3.5%—
#50Massachusetts2.8%—

All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.

People under 65 without health insurance

11.7%2024 ACS annual estimate

Share of Mississippi’s civilian noninstitutionalized residents under age 65 who lacked comprehensive health-insurance coverage at the time of the ACS survey.

This source snapshot keeps its own definition and period. A rank shown elsewhere applies only to that comparison’s measure and period.

Method and limitations

U.S. Census Bureau QuickFacts, sourced from the 2024 American Community Survey 1-year estimate.

  • This is a survey estimate for people under 65 and does not describe coverage type or continuity of coverage.
  • Insurance status alone does not measure affordability, access, quality, or health outcomes.
Mississippi · state comparison

Where do healthcare dollars go?

State spending is reported for 2020, the latest year available in this CMS state series. Choose a service to compare Mississippi with every state.

Mississippi · 2020$9,394
Mississippi rank#35among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark$10,191Same measure and period when published

#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.

Personal healthcare spending per resident

Personal health care expenditure per resident, assigned to the state where the patient resides.

2020 is the last year in this CMS state series. Personal health care excludes administration, public health, and investment included in national health expenditures. This is spending by all payers, not a household bill.

Hover to inspect. Click or tap to compare that period with every state. Focus the graph and use arrow keys, Home or End to select a period. Press Escape to return to the latest period.

Mississippi
Personal healthcare spending per resident history in Mississippi$7.1K$8.85K$10.59K20142020
2020 · Mississippi: $9,394 · Rank #35 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: $10,191 · Selected for state comparison
View history and select a period
Mississippi Personal healthcare spending per resident history
PeriodMississippiCompare
2014$7,500
2015$7,777
2016$8,170
2017$8,392
2018$8,417
2019$8,745
2020$9,394

Compare states on the graph

Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Mississippi stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.

Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. Mississippi has a dark outline.

Lower value · $7.52KHigher value · $14.01KStriped: unavailable

Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.

Mississippi · $9,3942020 · Rank #35 of 50, highest firstSelected state

50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.

Compare Mississippi with every state · 50 ranked
Personal healthcare spending per resident · 2020 · highest value ranked #1
RankStateValueComparison notes
#1New York$14,007—
#2Alaska$13,642—
#3Massachusetts$13,319—
#4Delaware$12,899—
#5West Virginia$12,769—
#6Vermont$12,756—
#7South Dakota$12,495—
#8Connecticut$12,489—
#9Maine$12,077—
#10New Jersey$11,868—
#11New Hampshire$11,793—
#12Rhode Island$11,694—
#13Pennsylvania$11,603—
#14North Dakota$11,301—
#15Wyoming$10,989—
#16Minnesota$10,846—
#17Maryland$10,839—
#18Indiana$10,517—
#19Louisiana$10,515—
#20Nebraska$10,514—
#21Ohio$10,478—
#22California$10,299—
#23Hawaii$10,291—
#24Kentucky$10,257—
#25Montana$10,212—
#26Illinois$10,190—
#27Oregon$10,071—
#28Wisconsin$9,982—
#29Missouri$9,921—
#30Michigan$9,897—
#31Florida$9,865—
#32Iowa$9,789—
#33Oklahoma$9,444—
#34Kansas$9,408—
#35Mississippi · your comparison$9,394—
#36Arkansas$9,338—
#37Tennessee$9,336—
#38Alabama$9,280—
#39Washington$9,265—
#40Virginia$9,195—
#41North Carolina$8,917—
#42New Mexico$8,902—
#43South Carolina$8,766—
#44Georgia$8,758—
#45Arizona$8,756—
#46Colorado$8,583—
#47Texas$8,406—
#48Nevada$8,348—
#49Idaho$8,148—
#50Utah$7,522—

All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.

Mississippi · state comparison

Health outcomes

Use age-adjusted mortality to account for different age distributions; life expectancy summarizes period death rates.

Mississippi · 202272.6 years
Mississippi rank#49among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark77.5 yearsSame measure and period when published

#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.

Life expectancy at birth

FactVote uses CDC National Center for Health Statistics annual complete life-table estimates for the total Mississippi population. Values are rounded to the published tenth of a year.

The latest published comparable state series ends in 2022, even though newer national life-expectancy estimates may be available. Period life expectancy summarizes current mortality rates; it is not a forecast of how long a particular person will live. The 2020 and 2021 estimates reflect the mortality shock during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Hover to inspect. Click or tap to compare that period with every state. Focus the graph and use arrow keys, Home or End to select a period. Press Escape to return to the latest period.

Mississippi
Life expectancy at birth history in Mississippi69.9 years74.2 years78.5 years20182022
2022 · Mississippi: 72.6 years · Rank #49 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: 77.5 years · Selected for state comparison
View history and select a period
Mississippi Life expectancy at birth history
PeriodMississippiCompare
201874.6 years
201974.4 years
202071.9 years
202170.9 years
202272.6 years

Compare states on the graph

Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Mississippi stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.

Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. Mississippi has a dark outline.

Lower value · 72.2 yearsHigher value · 80 yearsStriped: unavailable

Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.

Mississippi · 72.6 years2022 · Rank #49 of 50, highest firstSelected state

50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.

Compare Mississippi with every state · 50 ranked
Life expectancy at birth · 2022 · highest value ranked #1
RankStateValueComparison notes
#1Hawaii80 years—
#2Massachusetts79.8 years—
#3New Jersey79.6 years—
#4New York79.5 years—
#5Connecticut79.4 years—
#6California79.3 years—
#6Minnesota79.3 years—
#8Rhode Island79.2 years—
#9Utah79 years—
#10New Hampshire78.7 years—
#11Colorado78.5 years—
#12Idaho78.4 years—
#12Washington78.4 years—
#14Nebraska78.3 years—
#14Vermont78.3 years—
#16Wisconsin78.1 years—
#17Florida77.9 years—
#17Iowa77.9 years—
#17North Dakota77.9 years—
#20Maryland77.8 years—
#21Oregon77.7 years—
#22Illinois77.5 years—
#22Virginia77.5 years—
#24Montana77.3 years—
#24Pennsylvania77.3 years—
#24South Dakota77.3 years—
#27Texas77.1 years—
#28Michigan76.8 years—
#28Wyoming76.8 years—
#30Arizona76.7 years—
#31Maine76.6 years—
#32Delaware76.5 years—
#32Kansas76.5 years—
#34Nevada76.4 years—
#35Georgia75.9 years—
#35North Carolina75.9 years—
#37Alaska75.8 years—
#38Ohio75.6 years—
#39Indiana75.4 years—
#40Missouri75.2 years—
#41South Carolina75.1 years—
#42New Mexico74.5 years—
#43Arkansas73.9 years—
#44Alabama73.8 years—
#44Louisiana73.8 years—
#44Oklahoma73.8 years—
#44Tennessee73.8 years—
#48Kentucky73.6 years—
#49Mississippi · your comparison72.6 years—
#50West Virginia72.2 years—

All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.

Mississippi · state comparison

Chronic illness and health risks

Compare age-adjusted adult prevalence using the same survey year and definition.

Mississippi · 202315.1%
Mississippi rank#1among 48 states with data
U.S. benchmark10.7%Same measure and period when published

#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.

Diagnosed diabetes · age adjusted

Adult self-reported prevalence, age-adjusted to a common population.

Published CDC 2019–2023 series. Missing or suppressed estimates remain unranked. Confidence intervals describe sampling uncertainty; point ranks are not significance tests.

Hover to inspect. Click or tap to compare that period with every state. Focus the graph and use arrow keys, Home or End to select a period. Press Escape to return to the latest period.

Mississippi
Diagnosed diabetes · age adjusted history in Mississippi9.2%12.6%15.9%20192023
2023 · Mississippi: 15.1% · Rank #1 of 48, highest first · U.S. benchmark: 10.7% · Selected for state comparison
View history and select a period
Mississippi Diagnosed diabetes · age adjusted history
PeriodMississippiCompare
201913.5%
202013.3%
202113.8%
202213.9%
202315.1%

Compare states on the graph

Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Mississippi stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.

Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. Mississippi has a dark outline.

Lower value · 7.8%Higher value · 15.1%Striped: unavailable

Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.

Mississippi · 15.1%2023 · Rank #1 of 48, highest first95% confidence interval: 13.7% – 16.6%Selected state

50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.

Compare Mississippi with every state · 48 ranked, 2 unavailable
Diagnosed diabetes · age adjusted · 2023 · highest value ranked #1
RankStateValueComparison notes
#1Mississippi · your comparison15.1%95% CI: 13.7–16.6
#1West Virginia15.1%95% CI: 13.9–16.3
#3Louisiana14.6%95% CI: 13.4–15.8
#4Alabama14%95% CI: 12.7–15.3
#5Arkansas13.1%95% CI: 12–14.3
#6South Carolina12.7%95% CI: 11.9–13.6
#6Tennessee12.7%95% CI: 11.7–13.8
#8Texas12.1%95% CI: 11–13.3
#9Indiana11.7%95% CI: 11.1–12.4
#10Georgia11.5%95% CI: 10.7–12.3
#10Ohio11.5%95% CI: 10.8–12.2
#12Oklahoma11.3%95% CI: 10.5–12.1
#13Delaware11.1%95% CI: 9.8–12.6
#14North Carolina11%95% CI: 9.8–12.3
#15Illinois10.9%95% CI: 9.9–12.1
#15Maryland10.9%95% CI: 10.2–11.7
#15Michigan10.9%95% CI: 10.1–11.8
#18Nevada10.8%95% CI: 8.9–13
#18New Mexico10.8%95% CI: 9.3–12.6
#20Missouri10.7%95% CI: 9.9–11.7
#20South Dakota10.7%95% CI: 8.9–12.8
#22California10.6%95% CI: 9.8–11.4
#23Kansas10.5%95% CI: 9.7–11.3
#24Virginia10.4%95% CI: 9.5–11.4
#25Florida10.1%95% CI: 9.1–11.1
#26Rhode Island10%95% CI: 9.1–11
#27Arizona9.9%95% CI: 9.2–10.7
#27Iowa9.9%95% CI: 9.2–10.7
#29Nebraska9.7%95% CI: 9–10.3
#30Wisconsin9.6%95% CI: 9–10.2
#31Hawaii9.5%95% CI: 8.7–10.5
#31New York9.5%95% CI: 8.9–10.1
#31Oregon9.5%95% CI: 8.7–10.5
#34Wyoming9.4%95% CI: 8.5–10.5
#35Minnesota9.3%95% CI: 8.6–10
#36New Jersey9.1%95% CI: 8.4–9.9
#37Maine9%95% CI: 8.4–9.7
#38North Dakota8.9%95% CI: 8.1–9.7
#39Idaho8.7%95% CI: 7.9–9.6
#40Washington8.6%95% CI: 8.2–9
#41Massachusetts8.5%95% CI: 7.8–9.4
#42Connecticut8.4%95% CI: 7.6–9.3
#43Alaska8.2%95% CI: 7.4–9.2
#44Utah8.1%95% CI: 7.5–8.7
#45Colorado8%95% CI: 7.3–8.7
#46Montana7.9%95% CI: 7.2–8.7
#46New Hampshire7.9%95% CI: 7.1–8.8
#48Vermont7.8%95% CI: 7–8.7
—KentuckyNot availableNo comparable published observation for this period; excluded from rank.
—PennsylvaniaNot availableNo comparable published observation for this period; excluded from rank.

All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.

Mississippi · state comparison

Where are healthcare workers in short supply?

Compare coverage of need, practitioners needed, or affected population for each discipline.

Mississippi · June 30, 202634.1%
Mississippi rank#44among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark47.4%Same measure and period when published

#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.

Primary care · need met

HRSA-designated shortage areas; measures describe need within those areas, not the entire state population.

National report totals can include territories. Designation rules and populations differ by discipline; do not add disciplines. Absolute population and practitioner ranks also reflect state size.

Compare states on the graph

Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Mississippi stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.

Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. Mississippi has a dark outline.

Lower value · 11.2%Higher value · 83.2%Striped: unavailable

Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.

Mississippi · 34.1%June 30, 2026 · Rank #44 of 50, highest firstSelected state

50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.

Compare Mississippi with every state · 50 ranked
Primary care · need met · June 30, 2026 · highest value ranked #1
RankStateValueComparison notes
#1New Jersey83.2%—
#2Vermont82.6%—
#3South Carolina79.4%—
#4New Hampshire74.8%—
#5Rhode Island74.3%—
#6Louisiana72.1%—
#7Hawaii67.1%—
#8Utah65.4%—
#9Wisconsin65.2%—
#10Alabama63%—
#11Connecticut60.3%—
#12Massachusetts58%—
#13Tennessee58%—
#14Virginia57.2%—
#15Pennsylvania56.7%—
#16Maine56%—
#17Minnesota55.4%—
#18Wyoming54.4%—
#19Indiana54.2%—
#20California53.2%—
#21Arkansas52.6%—
#22Texas49.8%—
#23Ohio49.7%—
#24Nebraska49.1%—
#25Alaska48.9%—
#26North Carolina48.1%—
#27Colorado47.5%—
#28Michigan44.9%—
#29Oregon43.9%—
#30Idaho43.9%—
#31Washington42.4%—
#32Illinois41.5%—
#33Nevada41.5%—
#34Arizona41.2%—
#35Kansas41.1%—
#36Iowa40.5%—
#37Florida39.7%—
#38Georgia39.1%—
#39Montana38.5%—
#40West Virginia38.3%—
#41North Dakota36.5%—
#42New York35.3%—
#43South Dakota34.6%—
#44Mississippi · your comparison34.1%—
#45Maryland31.6%—
#46New Mexico31.4%—
#47Kentucky30.8%—
#48Oklahoma28.6%—
#49Missouri23.7%—
#50Delaware11.2%—

All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.

Mississippi · state comparison

Employer coverage costs

Premium comparisons use a published historical all-state employer survey. Total premiums combine employer and employee payments.

Mississippi · 2020$6,561
Mississippi rank#46among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark$7,149Same measure and period when published

#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.

Single coverage premium · all firms

Average total annual employer-plan premium per enrolled employee at private-sector establishments offering coverage.

Historical 2020 published all-state table; not a current quote. Includes both employer and employee contributions, rather than just a worker’s payment. Survey estimates and small firm samples carry uncertainty. Missing estimates remain unavailable.

Compare states on the graph

Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Mississippi stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.

Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. Mississippi has a dark outline.

Lower value · $6.39KHigher value · $8.64KStriped: unavailable

Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.

Mississippi · $6,5612020 · Rank #46 of 50, highest firstSelected state

50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.

Compare Mississippi with every state · 50 ranked
Single coverage premium · all firms · 2020 · highest value ranked #1
RankStateValueComparison notes
#1Alaska$8,635—
#2New York$8,177—
#3New Hampshire$7,991—
#4Vermont$7,868—
#5Wyoming$7,743—
#6Nebraska$7,611—
#7South Carolina$7,516—
#8Connecticut$7,501—
#9Maine$7,496—
#10Massachusetts$7,452—
#11Washington$7,440—
#12New Mexico$7,424—
#13Illinois$7,376—
#14New Jersey$7,373—
#15Maryland$7,352—
#16Rhode Island$7,326—
#17Indiana$7,319—
#18Delaware$7,280—
#19Wisconsin$7,250—
#20Pennsylvania$7,246—
#21North Dakota$7,216—
#22Colorado$7,206—
#23Missouri$7,179—
#24California$7,173—
#25Florida$7,078—
#26South Dakota$7,070—
#27Oklahoma$7,058—
#28Hawaii$7,040—
#29North Carolina$7,036—
#30Texas$7,017—
#31West Virginia$6,993—
#32Ohio$6,989—
#33Kentucky$6,949—
#34Iowa$6,932—
#35Virginia$6,928—
#36Oregon$6,917—
#37Minnesota$6,910—
#38Georgia$6,876—
#39Montana$6,860—
#40Idaho$6,744—
#41Louisiana$6,713—
#42Michigan$6,683—
#43Kansas$6,675—
#44Arizona$6,612—
#45Utah$6,593—
#46Mississippi · your comparison$6,561—
#47Nevada$6,493—
#48Tennessee$6,485—
#49Arkansas$6,414—
#50Alabama$6,393—

All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.

Mississippi · state comparison

Mental health and treatment

Adult statewide estimates use the same SAMHSA model and survey period. Treatment use is a share of all adults, not a share of adults with mental illness.

Mississippi · 2023–202420.5%
Mississippi rank#47among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark23.1%Same measure and period when published

#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.

Any Mental Illness · adults 18+

Civilian noninstitutionalized adults age 18+, past-year prevalence or treatment use, estimated by small-area survey models.

Mental illness and depression estimates pool 2023–2024; treatment use covers 2024 only. Definitions and model-based uncertainty differ from the national page’s annual 2025 survey estimates. Point-estimate ranks do not establish significant differences. Serious mental illness is a subset of any mental illness, so their percentages must not be added.

Compare states on the graph

Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Mississippi stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.

Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. Mississippi has a dark outline.

Lower value · 18.1%Higher value · 31.6%Striped: unavailable

Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.

Mississippi · 20.5%2023–2024 · Rank #47 of 50, highest firstSelected state

50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.

Compare Mississippi with every state · 50 ranked
Any Mental Illness · adults 18+ · 2023–2024 · highest value ranked #1
RankStateValueComparison notes
#1Oregon31.6%—
#2Vermont29.1%—
#3West Virginia28.1%—
#4Washington27.9%—
#5New Hampshire27.7%—
#6Tennessee27%—
#7Utah26.7%—
#8Maine26.7%—
#9Arkansas26.6%—
#10Colorado26.4%—
#11Rhode Island25.8%—
#12Missouri25.7%—
#13Montana25.6%—
#14Indiana25.3%—
#15Kentucky25.3%—
#16Georgia25.2%—
#17Iowa25%—
#18Massachusetts24.9%—
#19Wyoming24.7%—
#20Nevada24.6%—
#21Arizona24.6%—
#22Wisconsin24.6%—
#23Idaho24.5%—
#24Nebraska24.1%—
#25Louisiana24.1%—
#26Alaska24%—
#27Pennsylvania23.9%—
#28New Mexico23.9%—
#28Ohio23.9%—
#30Connecticut23.7%—
#31Kansas23.7%—
#32Michigan23.6%—
#33Virginia23.1%—
#34Alabama23%—
#35North Dakota23%—
#36Maryland22.7%—
#37Oklahoma22.6%—
#38Minnesota22.6%—
#39Illinois22.2%—
#40Delaware22.1%—
#41New York21.9%—
#42South Dakota21.8%—
#43California21.6%—
#44North Carolina21.4%—
#45Florida20.8%—
#46Texas20.7%—
#47Mississippi · your comparison20.5%—
#48Hawaii19.8%—
#49South Carolina19.8%—
#50New Jersey18.1%—

All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.

What candidates are saying

Explore statements about health coverage, healthcare costs, access to care and public health from FactVote’s Mississippi candidate profiles. Compare candidates within each recorded race, with each person’s matching statements kept together. These are candidate and campaign statements, not verified outcomes.

34 statements from 11 candidates

2026 Mississippi U.S. House — District 1 — General Election

2 candidates with matching statements · 6 statements

Cliff Johnson

3 statements

Democratic · U.S. House District 1 · MS

Care & public health

Over the last few months, DC politicians have slashed health care from middle and working class families to fund tax cuts for the wealthy. They’ve continued to watch as hard working families work 2 and 3 jobs, while still living in poverty, even as big corporations make record profits. They continue…

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: A Better Mississippi

Candidate campaign source

Over the last few months, DC politicians have slashed health care from middle and working class families to fund tax cuts for the wealthy. They’ve continued to watch as hard working families work 2 and 3 jobs, while still living in poverty, even as big corporations make record profits. They continue to watch on as a broken criminal justice system locks up more of our people than any nation – disproportionately the poor and people of color, while refusing to fund reentry and substance abuse programs to actually get at the core causes of crime and poverty.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 23, 2026

Cliff Johnson — candidate-owned primary source ↗
View 2 more statements from Cliff Johnson
Care & public health

Protect and expand access to affordable health care.

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Health Care

Candidate campaign source

Protect and expand access to affordable health care.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 23, 2026

Cliff Johnson — candidate-owned primary source ↗
Care & public health

Protect and expand affordable healthcare

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Cliff’s Priorities for Mississippi

Candidate campaign source

Protect and expand affordable healthcare

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 23, 2026

Cliff Johnson — candidate-owned primary source ↗

Trent Kelly

3 statements

Republican · U.S. House District 1 · MS

Health coverage

Protecting Social Security and Medicare for current beneficiaries and saving it for future generations is one of my most important responsibilities as a Member of Congress. It is no secret that demographic and economic factors will not allow us to continue the program unaltered. There are 10,000 bab…

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Issues

Candidate campaign source

Protecting Social Security and Medicare for current beneficiaries and saving it for future generations is one of my most important responsibilities as a Member of Congress. It is no secret that demographic and economic factors will not allow us to continue the program unaltered. There are 10,000 baby boomers retiring every day, and when these programs were first enacted there were more than 40 workers for every 1 retiree. Today, that number is below 3 workers per retiree and headed towards 2 to 1. Healthcare costs continue to rise much faster than inflation. In order to ensure the solvency of a program that senior citizens have come to rely on, changes must be made. Social Security cannot continue on the path it is currently on, and politicians who claim they want to preserve the program without offering reforms are not being honest. The days of doing nothing, burying our heads in the sand, and pretending the status quo is sustainable are over. We must ensure that Social Security will be here for the next generation, and I will continue to fight for the future of this vital program. f t # e

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 18, 2026

Trent Kelly campaign source 11 ↗
View 2 more statements from Trent Kelly
Health coverage

Mississippians and all Americans need to be in charge of their healthcare decisions, not the federal government. A person should be able to choose their doctor and receive the best possible treatment options. The system is in need of reform to lower drug prices and insurance premiums. We must also d…

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Issues

Candidate campaign source

Mississippians and all Americans need to be in charge of their healthcare decisions, not the federal government. A person should be able to choose their doctor and receive the best possible treatment options. The system is in need of reform to lower drug prices and insurance premiums. We must also do everything in our power to protect Social Security and Medicare for those who need it most. f t # e

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 18, 2026

Trent Kelly campaign source 8 ↗
Care & public health

I believe all people are made in the image of God, and therefore every person has value. That means that I think people should have access to the healthcare services that they need. As your voice in Congress, I believe it is our duty as a nation to protect the lives of the unborn. f t # e

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Issues

Candidate campaign source

I believe all people are made in the image of God, and therefore every person has value. That means that I think people should have access to the healthcare services that they need. As your voice in Congress, I believe it is our duty as a nation to protect the lives of the unborn. f t # e

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 18, 2026

Trent Kelly campaign source 9 ↗

2026 Mississippi U.S. House — District 2 — General Election

3 candidates with matching statements · 4 statements

Bennie Foster

1 statement

Independent · U.S. House District 2 · MS

Care & public health

Our district is currently facing food deserts, maternal healthcare deserts, and even mental health deserts. This means tens of thousands of residents do not have immediate access to these resources, and often have to travel over 50 miles to reach them. By investing in projects and creating a solutio…

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Public Health

Candidate campaign source

Our district is currently facing food deserts, maternal healthcare deserts, and even mental health deserts. This means tens of thousands of residents do not have immediate access to these resources, and often have to travel over 50 miles to reach them. By investing in projects and creating a solution friendly environment, we can end many of these deserts by attracting fresh food markets, birth support workers, mobile health centers, and mental health professionals.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026

Bennie Foster — candidate-owned primary source 2 ↗

Democratic · U.S. House District 2 · MS

Care & public health

Everyday, Congressman Thompson witnesses the inequities that continue to exist in this great country of ours. His progressive, yet realistic, approach is to overcome the disparities and be the unabashed champion for civil rights, equal education, and healthcare reform not only for his constituents b…

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Bennie Thompson for Congress

Candidate campaign source

Everyday, Congressman Thompson witnesses the inequities that continue to exist in this great country of ours. His progressive, yet realistic, approach is to overcome the disparities and be the unabashed champion for civil rights, equal education, and healthcare reform not only for his constituents but also for all Americans.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026

Bennie G. Thompson — candidate-owned primary source 3 ↗

Ron Eller

2 statements

Republican · U.S. House District 2 · MS

Care & public health

As a healthcare professional for decades, I know that adopting a one size fits all healthcare system will never work. People are different. People respond to different kinds of medications differently. We have to be cognizant that people need individualized healthcare solutions to the individual pro…

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: America's Medical System is Broken

Candidate campaign source

As a healthcare professional for decades, I know that adopting a one size fits all healthcare system will never work. People are different. People respond to different kinds of medications differently. We have to be cognizant that people need individualized healthcare solutions to the individual problems that affect their families.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026

Ron Eller — candidate-owned primary source 4 ↗
View 1 more statement from Ron Eller
Care & public health

The MAHA ("Make America Healthy Again") movement, largely driven by Robert F. Kennedy Jr. as Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS), focuses on addressing chronic disease through nutrition reform, scrutinizing environmental toxins, and overhauling public health institutions. The most widely kn…

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: America's Medical System is Broken

Candidate campaign source

The MAHA ("Make America Healthy Again") movement, largely driven by Robert F. Kennedy Jr. as Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS), focuses on addressing chronic disease through nutrition reform, scrutinizing environmental toxins, and overhauling public health institutions. The most widely known parts of the movement include: * Food and Nutrition Reform: This is a central and broadly popular aspect of MAHA. Initiatives include phasing out petroleum-based artificial food dyes and other chemical additives (like Red dye No. 3) from the U.S. food supply, overhauling the FDA's "Generally Recognized as Safe" (GRAS) loophole, and promoting whole, unprocessed foods. There is also a push to restrict ultra-processed foods, candy, and soda in federal programs like SNAP (Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program) and school meal plans. * Environmental Chemicals: The movement places a strong emphasis on the role of environmental toxins in chronic disease. It frequently criticizes specific pesticides like glyphosate and atrazine, and seeks to reduce exposure to chemicals like PFAS and phthalates. * Vaccine Policy and "Medical Freedom": A highly visible, though more controversial, part involves scrutinizing vaccine safety and the childhood vaccine schedule, and promoting "medical freedom" and informed consent. This includes calls for more transparency and the investigation of potential links between certain medical products (like acetaminophen and some psychiatric medications) and childhood conditions, despite a lack of consensus from mainstream scientific bodies. * Transparency and Research: A key policy goal is bringing "radical transparency" to government health data and ensuring that federally funded health research is free from conflicts of interest. * Lifestyle and Preventive Care: The movement advocates for preventive healthcare through lifestyle changes, such as physical activity initiatives (like the re-establishment of the Presidential Fitness Test) and addressing the harms of excessive screen time.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026

Ron Eller — candidate-owned primary source 4 ↗

2026 Mississippi U.S. House — District 3 — General Election

1 candidate with matching statements · 11 statements

Democratic · U.S. House District 3 · MS

Care & public health

While most Americans picture a long-term unsheltered individual when they think of homelessness, the reality is that most people experience it temporarily due to a lost job or medical crisis. For this reason, and for the overall health of our economy, the United States must expand rental and mortgag…

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Health care and reproductive policy

Candidate campaign source

While most Americans picture a long-term unsheltered individual when they think of homelessness, the reality is that most people experience it temporarily due to a lost job or medical crisis. For this reason, and for the overall health of our economy, the United States must expand rental and mortgage assistance nationwide. When families are no longer burdened by housing insecurity, more income will flow through local communities and create greater financial stability. However, chronic homelessness also remains a persistent issue. For these individuals, stable housing must come first because the practical reality of their situation often traps them in addiction and makes it nearly impossible for them to hold a job. The chronically homeless need a permanent residence that provides safety, for themselves and others, and the foundation needed to address mental health and addiction. Homelessness is a solvable problem that can be addressed with coordinated investment. By making housing security a national priority, we can strengthen communities and build a more productive society.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026

Michael A. Chiaradio — candidate-owned primary source 2 ↗
View 10 more statements from Michael A. Chiaradio
Care & public health

Train more healthcare workers

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Health care and reproductive policy

Candidate campaign source

Train more healthcare workers

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026

Michael A. Chiaradio — candidate-owned primary source 2 ↗
Care & public health

We must also expand mental health and addiction services as alternatives to incarceration for nonviolent offenders. Making it easier for reformed individuals to clear their records strengthens economic opportunity and community stability.

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Health care and reproductive policy

Candidate campaign source

We must also expand mental health and addiction services as alternatives to incarceration for nonviolent offenders. Making it easier for reformed individuals to clear their records strengthens economic opportunity and community stability.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026

Michael A. Chiaradio — candidate-owned primary source 2 ↗
Care & public health

We must embrace the fact that, as more Americans live longer, there will be a growing need for spending on quality healthcare.

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Learn more by clicking the dropdown menu:

Candidate campaign source

We must embrace the fact that, as more Americans live longer, there will be a growing need for spending on quality healthcare.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026

Michael A. Chiaradio — candidate-owned primary source 2 ↗
Care & public health

Address mental health and addiction

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Health care and reproductive policy

Candidate campaign source

Address mental health and addiction

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026

Michael A. Chiaradio — candidate-owned primary source 2 ↗
Care & public health

Expand low-cost access to healthcare

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Learn more by clicking the dropdown menu:

Candidate campaign source

Expand low-cost access to healthcare

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026

Michael A. Chiaradio — candidate-owned primary source 2 ↗
Care & public health

America’s growing need for quality healthcare gives the United States a chance to build assets that strengthen our healthcare industry.

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: America’s Healthcare Advantage

Candidate campaign source

America’s growing need for quality healthcare gives the United States a chance to build assets that strengthen our healthcare industry.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026

Michael A. Chiaradio — candidate-owned primary source 2 ↗
Care & public health

The key is to cultivate a workforce of American medical professionals and to develop long-term assets such as modern medical facilities and hospitals in the process. These investments position America to be a global leader in healthcare delivery and they create high-quality jobs in communities acros…

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Learn more by clicking the dropdown menu:

Candidate campaign source

The key is to cultivate a workforce of American medical professionals and to develop long-term assets such as modern medical facilities and hospitals in the process. These investments position America to be a global leader in healthcare delivery and they create high-quality jobs in communities across the country. Healthcare cost assistance is also one of the most effective ways to strengthen the social safety net and invest in the American consumer. However, our main focus should always be to steadily improve health outcomes for our people and to ensure that every American can age with dignity, security, and access to the care they deserve.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026

Michael A. Chiaradio — candidate-owned primary source 2 ↗
Care & public health

Every American should have access to high quality preventive and curative healthcare at a low cost. But today, out-of-pocket expenses are an enormous financial risk and premium costs strain household budgets, thereby weakening our economy.

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Health care and reproductive policy

Candidate campaign source

Every American should have access to high quality preventive and curative healthcare at a low cost. But today, out-of-pocket expenses are an enormous financial risk and premium costs strain household budgets, thereby weakening our economy.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026

Michael A. Chiaradio — candidate-owned primary source 2 ↗
Care & public health

Expand mental health and addiction alternatives

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Health care and reproductive policy

Candidate campaign source

Expand mental health and addiction alternatives

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026

Michael A. Chiaradio — candidate-owned primary source 2 ↗
Care & public health

The United States can grow stronger through well-managed immigration but only if we first invest in the infrastructure to support it. Past failures in domestic and foreign policy have left our economy less prepared to handle growth, with insufficient housing, schools, and healthcare to support new a…

Read exact statement & source

Source topic or question: Learn more by clicking the dropdown menu:

Candidate campaign source

The United States can grow stronger through well-managed immigration but only if we first invest in the infrastructure to support it. Past failures in domestic and foreign policy have left our economy less prepared to handle growth, with insufficient housing, schools, and healthcare to support new arrivals.

Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026

Michael A. Chiaradio — candidate-owned primary source 2 ↗
Race groups · Page 1 of 2
How statements are selected

This section matches specific health coverage, healthcare costs, access to care and public health terms in retained, attributed source text from published Mississippi candidate profiles. A profile heading or biography alone does not qualify. The Florida geography is fixed; saved state preferences cannot change these results. A mention can concern a community or group rather than Florida’s statewide measure.

Matching is automatic and does not establish a candidate’s stance, the accuracy of a claim, or an effect on the measured result. Results are grouped by recorded race, then by candidate name. Within each candidate, the matching issue mentions appear first. Only candidates with matching retained statements are shown; this is not a complete race roster. Repeated identical text for the same candidate is shown once. Coverage follows the existing state profiles and is not a complete record of all candidates or everything they have said. Review dates are not statement dates.

Mississippi incumbents

What incumbents are proposing

Explore reviewed bills sponsored by current Mississippi legislators and Mississippi’s congressional delegation, plus retained proposals from Mississippi’s governor and agencies. Each record keeps its latest recorded status and official evidence.

8 matching sponsorships or proposals · 7 Mississippi incumbents. These filters apply only to this section.

Angela Turner Ford

Mississippi Senate, District 16 · D–MS

1 proposal
View proposals from Angela Turner Ford
Mississippi Legislature · SB 2815

Storage of a firearm; create minimum duty of care and criminalize negligent storage.

Feb 3, 2026 · Died in committee

Angela Turner Ford · Sponsored

FactVote reviewed summary

SB 2815 would require reasonable care to prevent unauthorized minor access to a firearm outside the owner’s immediate control. The proposed misdemeanor requires knowing or reckless unsecured storage, access without lawful permission, and subsequent discharge, threatening/injuring use, or transport to school or another prohibited location. It exempts secured guns accessed through unlawful entry or theft, specified lawful activities with parental permission and supervision, and a minor under the owner’s immediate control at access. It creates no private cause of action, permits no home inspections and disclaims strict liability absent negligent conduct. The bill died in committee.

02/03 (S) Died In Committee. This bill did not enact the reviewed proposal.

Why this record is included

The mortality series includes firearm deaths across intents, including suicide and homicide. Storage rules and firearm regulation concern possible components of injury prevention without proving an effect on deaths. This connection does not establish causation. Actions after the measurement period cannot explain the earlier observed value.

Retained Mississippi evidence context: Firearm deaths. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.

SECTION 1. As used in this act: (a) "Immediate control" means a firearm carried on a person or within such proximity that a person can prevent access by a minor. (b) "Securely stored firearm" means a firearm that is stored in a manner that a reasonable person would believe prevents unauthorized access by a minor, including, but not limited to, a locked container, gun safe, or mechanical locking device. SECTION 2. (1) Any person who owns, possesses, or controls a firearm shall exercise reasonable care to prevent access to the firearm by a minor when the firearm is not under the person's immediate control. (2) This section establishes a minimum standard of care and does not create a private cause of action. SECTION 3. (1) A person commits the offense of negligent storage of a firearm if: (a) The person knowingly or recklessly stores or leaves a firearm unsecured; and (b) A minor gains access to the firearm without lawful permission; and (c) The minor discharges the firearm, uses the firearm to threaten or injure any person, or transports the firearm onto school property or any other location where possession of a firearm is unlawful. (2) A person convicted under subsection (1) of this section shall be guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by a fine not to exceed One Thousand Dollars ($1,000.00) or imprisonment in the county jail not to exceed six (6) months, or by both fine and imprisonment. SECTION 4. There shall be no civil or criminal liability under Section 2 or 3 of this act where: (a) The firearm was secured but accessed through unlawful entry or theft; (b) The minor was using the firearm in lawful hunting, sporting or agricultural activity with parental permission and supervision; or (c) The minor was under immediate control of the owner at the time of the access. SECTION 5. Nothing in this act shall authorize the inspection of private residences, impose strict liability absent negligent conduct, or be construed to infringe upon the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution or Article 3, Section 12 of the Mississippi Constitution of 1890.
Review official supporting evidence ↗

Brice Wiggins

Mississippi Senate, District 52 · R–MS

1 proposal
View proposals from Brice Wiggins
Mississippi Legislature · SB 2339

Firearms; criminalize possession of by certain persons and order removal after a hearing with a specific finding of risk.

Feb 12, 2026 · Died in committee

Brice Wiggins · Sponsored

FactVote reviewed summary

The reviewed section 1 of SB 2339 would prohibit firearm or ammunition possession by people convicted of the specified domestic-violence misdemeanor or subject to qualifying domestic-abuse court orders. The order category requires notice, an opportunity to participate in a hearing and specified threat findings or restrictions. The bill died in committee; these proposed state rules were not enacted by it.

02/12 (S) Died In Committee. This bill did not enact the reviewed proposal.

Why this record is included

The mortality series includes firearm deaths across intents, including suicide and homicide. Storage rules and firearm regulation concern possible components of injury prevention without proving an effect on deaths. This connection does not establish causation. Actions after the measurement period cannot explain the earlier observed value.

Retained Mississippi evidence context: Firearm deaths. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.

SECTION 1. (1) As used in this section, the following terms shall have the meaning ascribed herein unless: (a) "Ammunition" has the same meaning as defined in 18 U.S.C. § 921(a)(17)(A). (b) "Antique firearm" has the same meaning as defined in 18 U.S.C. § 921(a)(16). (c) "Firearm" has the same meaning as defined in 18 U.S.C. § 921(a)(3). (d) "Misdemeanor crime of domestic violence" means a conviction under Section 97-3-7(3)(a)(i). (2) It shall be unlawful for any person: (a) Who is subject to a court order that: (i) Was issued after a hearing of which such person received actual notice, and at which such person had an opportunity to participate; (ii) Restrains such person from harassing, stalking, or threatening an intimate partner of such person or child of such intimate partner or person, or engaging in other conduct that would place an intimate partner in reasonable fear of bodily injury to the partner or child; and (iii) 1. Includes a finding that such person represents a credible threat to the physical safety of such intimate partner or child; or 2. By its terms explicitly prohibits the use, attempted use, or threatened use of physical force against such intimate partner or child that would reasonably be expected to cause bodily injury; or (b) Who has been convicted in any court of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence, to possess any firearm or ammunition. (3) A person convicted of a violation of subsection (2) of this section shall be fined not more than Ten Thousand Dollars ($10,000.00) or imprisoned within the custody of the Department of Corrections for not less than two (2) years nor more than ten (10) years, or both.
Review official supporting evidence ↗

C. Scott Bounds

Mississippi House of Representatives, District 44 · R–MS

1 proposal
View proposals from C. Scott Bounds
Mississippi Legislature · HB 1793

Sales tax; exempt retail sales of firearm safes during annual Mississippi Second Amendment Weekend holiday.

Apr 6, 2026 · Enacted

C. Scott Bounds · Sponsored

FactVote reviewed summary

The reviewed HB 1793 amendment adds qualifying firearm safes to the annual Second Amendment Weekend sales-tax holiday. Its definition requires a locking container or enclosure intended for firearm storage and excludes glass-faced containers. The existing holiday for firearms, ammunition and hunting supplies is not treated as a newly created exemption. This affects storage costs, not a demonstrated change in firearm deaths. Eligibility requires transfer of title or possession during the holiday, or an order paid for and accepted for immediate shipment during it; a purchaser-requested shipping delay does not qualify under that ordering rule.

Approved by Governor on 2026-04-06. Enactment, effective dates, implementation and current enforceability are distinct.

Why this record is included

The mortality series includes firearm deaths across intents, including suicide and homicide. Storage rules and firearm regulation concern possible components of injury prevention without proving an effect on deaths. This connection does not establish causation. Actions after the measurement period cannot explain the earlier observed value.

Retained Mississippi evidence context: Firearm deaths. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.

(af) (i) Subject to the provisions of this paragraph (af), retail sales of firearms, ammunition * * *, hunting supplies and firearm safes if sold during the annual Mississippi Second Amendment Weekend holiday beginning at 12:01 a.m. on the last Friday in August and ending at 12:00 midnight the following Sunday. For the purposes of this paragraph (af), "hunting supplies" means tangible personal property used for hunting, including, and limited to, archery equipment, firearm and archery cases, firearm and archery accessories, hearing protection, holsters, belts and slings. Hunting supplies does not include animals used for hunting. For the purposes of this paragraph (af), the term "firearm safe" means a locking container or other enclosure, excluding glass-faced containers, equipped with a padlock, key lock, combination lock, or other locking device that is designed and intended for the secure storage of one (1) or more firearms. (ii) This paragraph (af) shall apply only if one or more of the following occur: 1. Title to and/or possession of an eligible item is transferred from a seller to a purchaser; and/or 2. A purchaser orders and pays for an eligible item and the seller accepts the order for immediate shipment, even if delivery is made after the time period provided in subparagraph (i) of this paragraph (af), provided that the purchaser has not requested or caused the delay in shipment.
Review official supporting evidence ↗

Rep. Bennie G. Thompson

U.S. House of Representatives, Mississippi District 2 · D–MS

1 proposal
View proposals from Rep. Bennie G. Thompson
U.S. Congress · Mississippi delegation · HR 2698

Bolstering Security Against Ghost Guns Act

Apr 7, 2025 · In Congress

Rep. Bennie G. Thompson · Sponsored

FactVote reviewed summary

The reviewed opening provision of HR 2698 would require a DHS-wide ghost-gun security strategy within one year, covering departmental coordination and cooperation with federal, state, local, Tribal and territorial partners. This is a pending planning and coordination requirement, not a firearm ban or proof of fewer deaths.

Referred to the Subcommittee on Border Security and Enforcement. No enactment of this bill is recorded at the review cutoff.

Why this record is included

The mortality series includes firearm deaths across intents, including suicide and homicide. Storage rules and firearm regulation concern possible components of injury prevention without proving an effect on deaths. The selected provision requires planning and coordination concerning firearm-related security threats. It does not regulate possession or establish implementation or reduced deaths. This connection does not establish causation or a change in the earlier measured value.

Retained Mississippi evidence context: Firearm deaths. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.

2.Department of Homeland Security policy to bolster security against threats posed by ghost guns(a)In generalSubtitle H of title VIII of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 451 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following new section:890E.Policy to bolster security against threats posed by ghost guns(a)In generalNot later than one year after the date of the enactment of this section, the Secretary, acting through the Under Secretary for Strategy, Policy, and Plans of the Department, shall issue a Department-wide strategy to bolster security against threats posed by ghost guns, in order to improve prevention, preparedness, and response to homeland security threats, such as an act of terrorism or targeted violence, associated with ghost guns. Such strategy shall identify the following activities:(1)Across the Department related to ghost guns and approaches to enhance cross-component information sharing and collaboration.(2)With Federal, State, local, Tribal, and territorial partners related to ghost guns and approaches to enhance the Department’s collaboration with such partners.
Review official supporting evidence ↗

Robert L. Johnson III

Mississippi House of Representatives, District 94 · D–MS

1 proposal
View proposals from Robert L. Johnson III
Mississippi Legislature · HB 123

Medicaid; expand eligibility under federal Affordable Care Act.

Feb 3, 2026 · Died in committee

Robert L. Johnson III · Sponsored

FactVote reviewed summary

HB 123 proposed Medicaid eligibility for specified people under 65 who are not pregnant, not entitled to or enrolled in Medicare Parts A or B, otherwise ineligible for Medicaid, and at or below 133% of the applicable federal poverty level stated in the bill. It specifies benchmark or benchmark-equivalent coverage. The bill died in committee; it did not enact Medicaid expansion.

02/03 (H) Died In Committee. This bill did not enact the reviewed proposal.

Why this record is included

The fact measures people under age 65 without health insurance. Eligibility for coverage directly concerns this population; payment for a particular service for people already insured does not itself establish expanded insurance enrollment. This connection does not establish causation. Actions after the measurement period cannot explain the earlier observed value.

Retained Mississippi evidence context: People under 65 without health insurance. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.

(29) Individuals who are under sixty-five (65) years of age, are not pregnant, are not entitled to or enrolled for benefits under Part A or Part B of Medicare, are not eligible for Medicaid under any other paragraph of this section, and whose income is not more than one hundred thirty-three percent (133%) of the federal poverty level applicable to a family of the size involved. Individuals eligible under this paragraph (29) shall receive benchmark coverage described in Section 1937(b)(1) of the federal Social Security Act, as amended, or benchmark equivalent coverage described in Section 1937(b)(2) of the federal Social Security Act, as amended. The eligibility of individuals covered under this paragraph shall be determined by the Division of Medicaid.
Review official supporting evidence ↗

Sen. Cindy Hyde-Smith

U.S. Senate, Mississippi · R–MS

2 proposals
View proposals from Sen. Cindy Hyde-Smith
U.S. Congress · Mississippi delegation · S 3697

SAVE Moms and Babies Act of 2026

Jan 27, 2026 · In Congress

Sen. Cindy Hyde-Smith · Sponsored

FactVote reviewed summary

The reviewed provisions of S 3697 would bar approval of new abortion drugs and specified investigational exemptions, and impose additional labeling, in-person dispensing, practitioner-certification and adverse-event reporting requirements for previously approved drugs. This pending proposal is not a statement that those requirements are currently in effect or a finding about medical safety. The definition excludes uses intended to produce a live birth, remove a dead unborn child or treat an ectopic pregnancy. Previously approved drugs are addressed through additional restrictions rather than an immediate blanket approval withdrawal. Existing investigational exemptions that would be prohibited under the proposal would be rescinded three years after enactment.

Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions. (Sponsor introductory remarks on measure: CR S292) No enactment of this bill is recorded at the review cutoff.

Why this record is included

This fact counts Mississippi residents with reported induced terminations, including reported occurrences outside Mississippi. It does not count all procedures performed in Mississippi or establish complete reporting from every other state. This connection does not establish causation. Actions after the measurement period cannot explain the earlier observed value.

Retained Mississippi evidence context: Residents with reported induced terminations. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.

2.Abortion drugs prohibited(a)In generalSection 505 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 355) is amended—(1)by redesignating the second subsection (z), as added by section 3601(a) of division FF of Public Law 117–328, as subsection (aa); and(2)by adding at the end the following:(bb)Abortion drugs(1)ProhibitionsThe Secretary shall not approve—(A)any application submitted under subsection (b) or (j) for marketing an abortion drug; or(B)grant an investigational use exemption under subsection (i) for—(i)an abortion drug; or(ii)any investigation in which the unborn child of a woman known to be pregnant is knowingly destroyed.(2)Previously approved abortion drugsIf an approval described in paragraph (1) is in effect for an abortion drug as of the date of enactment of the Support And Value Expectant Moms and Babies Act of 2026, the Secretary shall—(A)not approve any labeling change—(i)to approve the use of such abortion drug after 70 days gestation; or(ii)to approve the dispensing of such abortion drug by any means other than in-person administration by the prescribing health care practitioner;(B)treat such abortion drug as subject to section 503(b)(1); and(C)require such abortion drug to be subject to a risk evaluation and mitigation strategy under section 505–1 that at a minimum—(i)requires health care practitioners who prescribe such abortion drug—(I)to be certified in accordance with the strategy; and(II)to not be acting in their capacity as a pharmacist;(ii)as part of the certification process referred to in clause (i), requires such practitioners—(I)to have the ability to assess the duration of pregnancy accurately;(II)to have the ability to diagnose ectopic pregnancies;(III)to have the ability to provide surgical intervention in cases of incomplete abortion or severe bleeding;(IV)to have the ability to ensure patient access to medical facilities equipped to provide blood transfusions and resuscitation, if necessary; and(V)to report any deaths or other adverse events associated with the use of such abortion drug to the Food and Drug Administration and to the manufacturer of such abortion drug, identifying the patient by a non-identifiable reference and the serial number from each package of such abortion drug;(iii)limits the dispensing of such abortion drug to patients—(I)in a clinic, medical office, or hospital by means of in-person administration by the prescribing health care practitioner; and(II)not in pharmacies or any setting other than the health care settings described in subclause (I);(iv)requires the prescribing health care practitioner to give to the patient documentation on any risk of serious complications associated with use of such abortion drug and receive acknowledgment of such receipt from the patient;(v)requires all known adverse events associated with such abortion drug to be reported, excluding any individually identifiable patient information, to the Food and Drug Administration by the—(I)manufacturers of such abortion drug; and(II)prescribers of such abortion drug; and(vi)requires reporting of administration of the abortion drug as required by State law, or in the absence of a State law regarding such reporting, in the same manner as a surgical abortion.(3)Reporting on adverse events by other health care practitionersThe Secretary shall require all other health care practitioners to report to the Food and Drug Administration any adverse events experienced by their patients that are connected to use of an abortion drug, excluding any individually identifiable patient information.(4)Rule of constructionNothing in this section shall be construed to restrict the authority of the Federal Government, or of a State, to establish, implement, and enforce requirements and restrictions with respect to abortion drugs under provisions of law other than this section that are in addition to the requirements and restrictions under this section.(5)DefinitionsIn this section:(A)The term abortion drug means any drug, substance, or combination of drugs or substances that is intended for use or that is in fact used (irrespective of how the product is labeled) to intentionally kill the unborn child of a woman known to be pregnant, or to intentionally terminate the pregnancy of a woman known to be pregnant, with an intention other than—(i)to produce a live birth;(ii)to remove a dead unborn child; or(iii)to treat an ectopic pregnancy.(B)The term adverse event includes each of the following:(i)A fatality.(ii)An ectopic pregnancy.(iii)A hospitalization.(iv)A blood loss requiring a transfusion.(v)An infection, including endometritis, pelvic inflammatory disease, and pelvic infections with sepsis.(vi)A severe infection.(C)The term gestation means the period of days of pregnancy beginning on the first day of the last menstrual period.(D)The term health care practitioner means any individual who is licensed, registered, or otherwise permitted, by the United States or the jurisdiction in which the individual practices, to prescribe drugs subject to section 503(b)(1). (E) The term unborn child means an individual organism of the species homo sapiens, beginning at fertilization, until the point of being born alive as defined in section 8(b) of title 1, United States Code. .(b)Ongoing investigational useIn the case of any investigational use of a drug pursuant to an investigational use exemption under section 505(i) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 355(i)) that was granted before the date of enactment of this Act, such exemption is deemed to be rescinded as of the day that is 3 years after the date of enactment of this Act if the Secretary would be prohibited by section 505(bb)(1)(B) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, as added by subsection (a), from granting such exemption as of such day.
Review official supporting evidence ↗
U.S. Congress · Mississippi delegation · S 1600

Save Healthcare Workers Act

May 5, 2025 · In Congress

Sen. Cindy Hyde-Smith · Sponsored

FactVote reviewed summary

The reviewed S 1600 provisions would criminalize knowing assaults on covered hospital or contractor personnel on hospital grounds, while working or because of hospital duties. Grounds include associated buildings, roads, paths and open spaces. Dangerous-weapon use, serious bodily injury or a presidential Stafford Act emergency/disaster declaration would trigger enhanced penalties. The disability defense requires a clear and direct manifestation of the disability and inability to appreciate the conduct’s nature, quality or wrongfulness, proved by the defendant by a preponderance of evidence. The pending bill covers simple as well as aggravated assaults; only the latter are a component of the FBI violent-crime series.

Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary. No enactment of this bill is recorded at the review cutoff.

Why this record is included

The FBI series includes reported murder and nonnegligent manslaughter, rape, robbery and aggravated assault. The reviewed provision concerns a component such as murder, nonconsensual sexual penetration or aggravated assault; not every offense covered by a broader statute belongs in this series. Reporting coverage is incomplete and variable. This connection does not establish causation. Actions after the measurement period cannot explain the earlier observed value.

Retained Mississippi evidence context: Reported violent-crime rate. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.

2.Prevention of violence against hospital personnel(a)Prohibition on assault of hospital personnel in the performance of dutiesChapter 7 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:120.Assault of hospital personnel(a)In generalWhoever knowingly assaults an individual employed by a hospital engaged in interstate commerce, or an entity contracting with a hospital or other medical facility engaged in interstate commerce, on the grounds of a hospital while the individual is engaged in or on account of duties at the hospital shall be fined under this title, imprisoned for not more than 10 years, or both. (b)Enhanced penalties(1)Acts involving dangerous weapons or acts that result in bodily injuryWhoever, in the commission of any act described in subsection (a), uses a firearm or dangerous weapon or inflicts serious bodily injury, shall, in addition to the penalties provided for in that subsection, be fined under this title, imprisoned for not more than 20 years, or both.(2)Acts committed during emergency declarationsWhoever commits any act described in subsection (a) during the period of a declaration of a public emergency for the area in which the act is committed shall be fined under this title, imprisoned for not more than 20 years, or both. (c)Affirmative defense(1)In generalIt shall be an affirmative defense to a prosecution under this section that—(A)the defendant is a person with a physical, mental, or intellectual disability;(B)the conduct of the defendant was a clear and direct manifestation of such disability; and(C)the defendant, as a result of such disability, was unable to appreciate the nature and quality or wrongfulness of such conduct.(2)Burden of proofThe defendant has the burden of proving the defense under this subsection by a preponderance of the evidence.(d)DefinitionsIn this section:(1)Dangerous weaponThe term dangerous weapon means a weapon, device, instrument, material, or substance, animate or inanimate, that is used for, or is readily capable of, causing death or serious bodily injury.(2)Declaration of a public emergencyThe term declaration of a public emergency means an emergency or major disaster declared by the President pursuant to the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq.).(3)DisabilityThe term disability means a disability described in section 3(1)(A) of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 12102(1)(A)).(4)Grounds of a hospitalThe term grounds of a hospital means the hospital buildings and the land used for the purposes of the hospital, including all buildings, roads, paths, and open spaces.(5)HospitalThe term hospital means any of the following medical facilities:(A)A hospital (as defined in section 1861(e) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395x(e))).(B)A long-term care hospital (as defined in section 1861(ccc) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 1395x(ccc))).(C)A rehabilitation facility (as described in section 1886(j)(1)(A) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 1395ww(j)(1)(A))).(D)A children's hospital (as described in section 1886(d)(1)(B)(iii) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 1395ww(d)(1)(B)(iii))).(E)A cancer hospital (as described in section 1886(d)(1)(B)(v) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 1395ww(d)(1)(B)(v))).(F)A critical access hospital (as defined in section 1861(mm)(1) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 1395x(mm)(1))).(G)A rural emergency hospital (as defined in section 1861(kkk)(2) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 1395x(kkk)(2))).(6)Serious bodily injuryThe term serious bodily injury has the meaning given the term in section as the meaning given the term in section 1365(h)..
Review official supporting evidence ↗
What sponsorship and proposal counts tell us

Only current Mississippi officeholders retained in the reviewed collection qualify. Bills require a recorded primary sponsorship; cosponsors and signing officials are excluded from sponsorship counts. An official introducer recorded as acting by request is labeled “Introduced by request”; that procedural role does not establish personal policy endorsement. Governor and agency records qualify when recorded as proposed. A separately verified governor transmittal can also establish an original proposal whose latest status reflects its later outcome. Signing an enacted law alone does not establish a proposal. A record appearing under several facts is counted once per officeholder. A bill with multiple primary sponsors appears under each recorded sponsor.

Enacted bills, adopted resolutions and unsuccessful measures remain visible as proposal history. Passing one chamber is not enactment. These counts do not measure effectiveness or prove that an action changed a Mississippi statistic. Collection reviewed Sep 16, 2026.