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.
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
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
2024 · Mississippi: 9.7% · Rank #10 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: 8.2% · Selected for state comparisonView history and select a period
Mississippi Uninsured rate · all ages history
Period
Mississippi
Compare
2014
14.5%
2015
12.7%
2016
11.8%
2017
12%
2018
12.1%
2019
13%
2020
Not available
2021
11.9%
2022
10.8%
2023
10.3%
2024
9.7%
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
Rank
State
Value
Comparison notes
#1
Texas
16.7%
—
#2
Georgia
12%
—
#3
Oklahoma
11.5%
—
#4
Nevada
11.4%
—
#5
Alaska
11%
—
#6
Florida
10.9%
—
#7
Arizona
10.3%
—
#7
Wyoming
10.3%
—
#9
New Mexico
10.1%
—
#10
Mississippi · your comparison
9.7%
—
#10
Tennessee
9.7%
—
#12
Arkansas
9.4%
—
#13
Idaho
9.2%
—
#14
South Carolina
9%
—
#15
Montana
8.8%
—
#16
North Carolina
8.6%
—
#17
Kansas
8.5%
—
#18
Utah
8.3%
—
#19
Alabama
8.2%
—
#20
South Dakota
8.1%
—
#21
Colorado
7.9%
—
#22
Louisiana
7.7%
—
#22
Missouri
7.7%
—
#22
New Jersey
7.7%
—
#25
Indiana
7.5%
—
#26
Nebraska
7.1%
—
#27
Delaware
6.9%
—
#27
Illinois
6.9%
—
#27
Virginia
6.9%
—
#30
Kentucky
6.8%
—
#31
Ohio
6.7%
—
#32
Washington
6.5%
—
#33
Maryland
6.3%
—
#34
North Dakota
6.1%
—
#35
California
5.9%
—
#36
Connecticut
5.8%
—
#36
Pennsylvania
5.8%
—
#36
West Virginia
5.8%
—
#39
Maine
5.5%
—
#40
Iowa
5.4%
—
#41
Wisconsin
5.3%
—
#42
Oregon
5.2%
—
#43
Michigan
5.1%
—
#43
Minnesota
5.1%
—
#45
New York
5%
—
#46
Rhode Island
4.6%
—
#47
New Hampshire
4.5%
—
#48
Vermont
4.2%
—
#49
Hawaii
3.5%
—
#50
Massachusetts
2.8%
—
All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.
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.
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
2020 · Mississippi: $9,394 · Rank #35 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: $10,191 · Selected for state comparisonView history and select a period
Mississippi Personal healthcare spending per resident history
Period
Mississippi
Compare
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
Rank
State
Value
Comparison notes
#1
New York
$14,007
—
#2
Alaska
$13,642
—
#3
Massachusetts
$13,319
—
#4
Delaware
$12,899
—
#5
West Virginia
$12,769
—
#6
Vermont
$12,756
—
#7
South Dakota
$12,495
—
#8
Connecticut
$12,489
—
#9
Maine
$12,077
—
#10
New Jersey
$11,868
—
#11
New Hampshire
$11,793
—
#12
Rhode Island
$11,694
—
#13
Pennsylvania
$11,603
—
#14
North Dakota
$11,301
—
#15
Wyoming
$10,989
—
#16
Minnesota
$10,846
—
#17
Maryland
$10,839
—
#18
Indiana
$10,517
—
#19
Louisiana
$10,515
—
#20
Nebraska
$10,514
—
#21
Ohio
$10,478
—
#22
California
$10,299
—
#23
Hawaii
$10,291
—
#24
Kentucky
$10,257
—
#25
Montana
$10,212
—
#26
Illinois
$10,190
—
#27
Oregon
$10,071
—
#28
Wisconsin
$9,982
—
#29
Missouri
$9,921
—
#30
Michigan
$9,897
—
#31
Florida
$9,865
—
#32
Iowa
$9,789
—
#33
Oklahoma
$9,444
—
#34
Kansas
$9,408
—
#35
Mississippi · your comparison
$9,394
—
#36
Arkansas
$9,338
—
#37
Tennessee
$9,336
—
#38
Alabama
$9,280
—
#39
Washington
$9,265
—
#40
Virginia
$9,195
—
#41
North Carolina
$8,917
—
#42
New Mexico
$8,902
—
#43
South Carolina
$8,766
—
#44
Georgia
$8,758
—
#45
Arizona
$8,756
—
#46
Colorado
$8,583
—
#47
Texas
$8,406
—
#48
Nevada
$8,348
—
#49
Idaho
$8,148
—
#50
Utah
$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.
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
2022 · Mississippi: 72.6 years · Rank #49 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: 77.5 years · Selected for state comparisonView history and select a period
Mississippi Life expectancy at birth history
Period
Mississippi
Compare
2018
74.6 years
2019
74.4 years
2020
71.9 years
2021
70.9 years
2022
72.6 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
Rank
State
Value
Comparison notes
#1
Hawaii
80 years
—
#2
Massachusetts
79.8 years
—
#3
New Jersey
79.6 years
—
#4
New York
79.5 years
—
#5
Connecticut
79.4 years
—
#6
California
79.3 years
—
#6
Minnesota
79.3 years
—
#8
Rhode Island
79.2 years
—
#9
Utah
79 years
—
#10
New Hampshire
78.7 years
—
#11
Colorado
78.5 years
—
#12
Idaho
78.4 years
—
#12
Washington
78.4 years
—
#14
Nebraska
78.3 years
—
#14
Vermont
78.3 years
—
#16
Wisconsin
78.1 years
—
#17
Florida
77.9 years
—
#17
Iowa
77.9 years
—
#17
North Dakota
77.9 years
—
#20
Maryland
77.8 years
—
#21
Oregon
77.7 years
—
#22
Illinois
77.5 years
—
#22
Virginia
77.5 years
—
#24
Montana
77.3 years
—
#24
Pennsylvania
77.3 years
—
#24
South Dakota
77.3 years
—
#27
Texas
77.1 years
—
#28
Michigan
76.8 years
—
#28
Wyoming
76.8 years
—
#30
Arizona
76.7 years
—
#31
Maine
76.6 years
—
#32
Delaware
76.5 years
—
#32
Kansas
76.5 years
—
#34
Nevada
76.4 years
—
#35
Georgia
75.9 years
—
#35
North Carolina
75.9 years
—
#37
Alaska
75.8 years
—
#38
Ohio
75.6 years
—
#39
Indiana
75.4 years
—
#40
Missouri
75.2 years
—
#41
South Carolina
75.1 years
—
#42
New Mexico
74.5 years
—
#43
Arkansas
73.9 years
—
#44
Alabama
73.8 years
—
#44
Louisiana
73.8 years
—
#44
Oklahoma
73.8 years
—
#44
Tennessee
73.8 years
—
#48
Kentucky
73.6 years
—
#49
Mississippi · your comparison
72.6 years
—
#50
West Virginia
72.2 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.
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
2023 · Mississippi: 15.1% · Rank #1 of 48, highest first · U.S. benchmark: 10.7% · Selected for state comparisonView history and select a period
Mississippi Diagnosed diabetes · age adjusted history
Period
Mississippi
Compare
2019
13.5%
2020
13.3%
2021
13.8%
2022
13.9%
2023
15.1%
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
Rank
State
Value
Comparison notes
#1
Mississippi · your comparison
15.1%
95% CI: 13.7–16.6
#1
West Virginia
15.1%
95% CI: 13.9–16.3
#3
Louisiana
14.6%
95% CI: 13.4–15.8
#4
Alabama
14%
95% CI: 12.7–15.3
#5
Arkansas
13.1%
95% CI: 12–14.3
#6
South Carolina
12.7%
95% CI: 11.9–13.6
#6
Tennessee
12.7%
95% CI: 11.7–13.8
#8
Texas
12.1%
95% CI: 11–13.3
#9
Indiana
11.7%
95% CI: 11.1–12.4
#10
Georgia
11.5%
95% CI: 10.7–12.3
#10
Ohio
11.5%
95% CI: 10.8–12.2
#12
Oklahoma
11.3%
95% CI: 10.5–12.1
#13
Delaware
11.1%
95% CI: 9.8–12.6
#14
North Carolina
11%
95% CI: 9.8–12.3
#15
Illinois
10.9%
95% CI: 9.9–12.1
#15
Maryland
10.9%
95% CI: 10.2–11.7
#15
Michigan
10.9%
95% CI: 10.1–11.8
#18
Nevada
10.8%
95% CI: 8.9–13
#18
New Mexico
10.8%
95% CI: 9.3–12.6
#20
Missouri
10.7%
95% CI: 9.9–11.7
#20
South Dakota
10.7%
95% CI: 8.9–12.8
#22
California
10.6%
95% CI: 9.8–11.4
#23
Kansas
10.5%
95% CI: 9.7–11.3
#24
Virginia
10.4%
95% CI: 9.5–11.4
#25
Florida
10.1%
95% CI: 9.1–11.1
#26
Rhode Island
10%
95% CI: 9.1–11
#27
Arizona
9.9%
95% CI: 9.2–10.7
#27
Iowa
9.9%
95% CI: 9.2–10.7
#29
Nebraska
9.7%
95% CI: 9–10.3
#30
Wisconsin
9.6%
95% CI: 9–10.2
#31
Hawaii
9.5%
95% CI: 8.7–10.5
#31
New York
9.5%
95% CI: 8.9–10.1
#31
Oregon
9.5%
95% CI: 8.7–10.5
#34
Wyoming
9.4%
95% CI: 8.5–10.5
#35
Minnesota
9.3%
95% CI: 8.6–10
#36
New Jersey
9.1%
95% CI: 8.4–9.9
#37
Maine
9%
95% CI: 8.4–9.7
#38
North Dakota
8.9%
95% CI: 8.1–9.7
#39
Idaho
8.7%
95% CI: 7.9–9.6
#40
Washington
8.6%
95% CI: 8.2–9
#41
Massachusetts
8.5%
95% CI: 7.8–9.4
#42
Connecticut
8.4%
95% CI: 7.6–9.3
#43
Alaska
8.2%
95% CI: 7.4–9.2
#44
Utah
8.1%
95% CI: 7.5–8.7
#45
Colorado
8%
95% CI: 7.3–8.7
#46
Montana
7.9%
95% CI: 7.2–8.7
#46
New Hampshire
7.9%
95% CI: 7.1–8.8
#48
Vermont
7.8%
95% CI: 7–8.7
—
Kentucky
Not available
No comparable published observation for this period; excluded from rank.
—
Pennsylvania
Not available
No 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.
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
Rank
State
Value
Comparison notes
#1
New Jersey
83.2%
—
#2
Vermont
82.6%
—
#3
South Carolina
79.4%
—
#4
New Hampshire
74.8%
—
#5
Rhode Island
74.3%
—
#6
Louisiana
72.1%
—
#7
Hawaii
67.1%
—
#8
Utah
65.4%
—
#9
Wisconsin
65.2%
—
#10
Alabama
63%
—
#11
Connecticut
60.3%
—
#12
Massachusetts
58%
—
#13
Tennessee
58%
—
#14
Virginia
57.2%
—
#15
Pennsylvania
56.7%
—
#16
Maine
56%
—
#17
Minnesota
55.4%
—
#18
Wyoming
54.4%
—
#19
Indiana
54.2%
—
#20
California
53.2%
—
#21
Arkansas
52.6%
—
#22
Texas
49.8%
—
#23
Ohio
49.7%
—
#24
Nebraska
49.1%
—
#25
Alaska
48.9%
—
#26
North Carolina
48.1%
—
#27
Colorado
47.5%
—
#28
Michigan
44.9%
—
#29
Oregon
43.9%
—
#30
Idaho
43.9%
—
#31
Washington
42.4%
—
#32
Illinois
41.5%
—
#33
Nevada
41.5%
—
#34
Arizona
41.2%
—
#35
Kansas
41.1%
—
#36
Iowa
40.5%
—
#37
Florida
39.7%
—
#38
Georgia
39.1%
—
#39
Montana
38.5%
—
#40
West Virginia
38.3%
—
#41
North Dakota
36.5%
—
#42
New York
35.3%
—
#43
South Dakota
34.6%
—
#44
Mississippi · your comparison
34.1%
—
#45
Maryland
31.6%
—
#46
New Mexico
31.4%
—
#47
Kentucky
30.8%
—
#48
Oklahoma
28.6%
—
#49
Missouri
23.7%
—
#50
Delaware
11.2%
—
All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.
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
Rank
State
Value
Comparison notes
#1
Alaska
$8,635
—
#2
New York
$8,177
—
#3
New Hampshire
$7,991
—
#4
Vermont
$7,868
—
#5
Wyoming
$7,743
—
#6
Nebraska
$7,611
—
#7
South Carolina
$7,516
—
#8
Connecticut
$7,501
—
#9
Maine
$7,496
—
#10
Massachusetts
$7,452
—
#11
Washington
$7,440
—
#12
New Mexico
$7,424
—
#13
Illinois
$7,376
—
#14
New Jersey
$7,373
—
#15
Maryland
$7,352
—
#16
Rhode Island
$7,326
—
#17
Indiana
$7,319
—
#18
Delaware
$7,280
—
#19
Wisconsin
$7,250
—
#20
Pennsylvania
$7,246
—
#21
North Dakota
$7,216
—
#22
Colorado
$7,206
—
#23
Missouri
$7,179
—
#24
California
$7,173
—
#25
Florida
$7,078
—
#26
South Dakota
$7,070
—
#27
Oklahoma
$7,058
—
#28
Hawaii
$7,040
—
#29
North Carolina
$7,036
—
#30
Texas
$7,017
—
#31
West Virginia
$6,993
—
#32
Ohio
$6,989
—
#33
Kentucky
$6,949
—
#34
Iowa
$6,932
—
#35
Virginia
$6,928
—
#36
Oregon
$6,917
—
#37
Minnesota
$6,910
—
#38
Georgia
$6,876
—
#39
Montana
$6,860
—
#40
Idaho
$6,744
—
#41
Louisiana
$6,713
—
#42
Michigan
$6,683
—
#43
Kansas
$6,675
—
#44
Arizona
$6,612
—
#45
Utah
$6,593
—
#46
Mississippi · your comparison
$6,561
—
#47
Nevada
$6,493
—
#48
Tennessee
$6,485
—
#49
Arkansas
$6,414
—
#50
Alabama
$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.
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
Rank
State
Value
Comparison notes
#1
Oregon
31.6%
—
#2
Vermont
29.1%
—
#3
West Virginia
28.1%
—
#4
Washington
27.9%
—
#5
New Hampshire
27.7%
—
#6
Tennessee
27%
—
#7
Utah
26.7%
—
#8
Maine
26.7%
—
#9
Arkansas
26.6%
—
#10
Colorado
26.4%
—
#11
Rhode Island
25.8%
—
#12
Missouri
25.7%
—
#13
Montana
25.6%
—
#14
Indiana
25.3%
—
#15
Kentucky
25.3%
—
#16
Georgia
25.2%
—
#17
Iowa
25%
—
#18
Massachusetts
24.9%
—
#19
Wyoming
24.7%
—
#20
Nevada
24.6%
—
#21
Arizona
24.6%
—
#22
Wisconsin
24.6%
—
#23
Idaho
24.5%
—
#24
Nebraska
24.1%
—
#25
Louisiana
24.1%
—
#26
Alaska
24%
—
#27
Pennsylvania
23.9%
—
#28
New Mexico
23.9%
—
#28
Ohio
23.9%
—
#30
Connecticut
23.7%
—
#31
Kansas
23.7%
—
#32
Michigan
23.6%
—
#33
Virginia
23.1%
—
#34
Alabama
23%
—
#35
North Dakota
23%
—
#36
Maryland
22.7%
—
#37
Oklahoma
22.6%
—
#38
Minnesota
22.6%
—
#39
Illinois
22.2%
—
#40
Delaware
22.1%
—
#41
New York
21.9%
—
#42
South Dakota
21.8%
—
#43
California
21.6%
—
#44
North Carolina
21.4%
—
#45
Florida
20.8%
—
#46
Texas
20.7%
—
#47
Mississippi · your comparison
20.5%
—
#48
Hawaii
19.8%
—
#49
South Carolina
19.8%
—
#50
New Jersey
18.1%
—
All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.
Explore current officeholders and explicitly reviewed historical executive officials, labeled at the time of their actions. Timeline dates, action type, status and search also filter this list. Read any record’s summary, latest recorded status and official evidence below, or open it beside the timeline.
11 of 11 reviewed Mississippi actions · newest first
Apr 8, 2026 · HB 1613 · Drug trafficking; revise dosage units and regulate abortion-inducing drugs. · SignedGovernor · HB 1613
Drug trafficking; revise dosage units and regulate abortion-inducing drugs.
Apr 8, 2026 · Signed
Gov. Tate Reeves · Signed
FactVote reviewed summary
Tate Reeves signed HB 1613. The reviewed section 2 of HB 1613 restricts knowing or intentional distribution, prescribing and specified possession of abortion-inducing drugs, except as otherwise provided by Mississippi law. It excludes drugs prescribed for other medical indications and specified lawful care, including miscarriage and ectopic-pregnancy treatment. It provides criminal penalties and Attorney General civil enforcement. The source history does not identify a principal author, so only the verified governor signing is attributed.
Approved by Governor on 2026-04-08. Enactment, effective dates, implementation and current enforceability are distinct.
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.
SECTION 2. (1) It is unlawful for any person to knowingly or intentionally create, sell, barter, transfer, manufacture, distribute, dispense, prescribe or possess with knowledge or intent to create, sell, barter, transfer, manufacture, distribute, dispense or prescribe an "abortion-inducing drug," which is defined as a medicine, drug or any other substance prescribed or dispensed with the intent of terminating the clinically diagnosable pregnancy of a woman to cause the death of the unborn child, except as otherwise provided by the laws of the State of Mississippi. This includes the use of drugs known to have abortion-inducing properties, which are prescribed specifically with the intent of causing an abortion. Use of those drugs to induce abortion is also known as "medical abortion." This definition does not apply to drugs that may be known to cause an abortion but are prescribed for other medical indications, such as chemotherapeutic agents and diagnostic drugs, or are used in the course of medical care that is lawful under the laws of the State of Mississippi and within the physician's reasonable medical judgment and the applicable standard of care, including, but not limited to, the treatment of miscarriage, ectopic pregnancy, fetal demise, induction of labor, and management of postpartum complications. (2) Any person who violates subsection (1) of this section shall be, if convicted, punished by imprisonment in the custody of the Department of Corrections for not less than one (1) year nor more than ten (10) years. In addition to the criminal penalties provided for in this subsection (2), the Attorney General may bring a civil action in the name of the State of Mississippi to enjoin any violation of subsection (1) of this section related to abortion-inducing drugs, to obtain declaratory or injunctive relief, and to recover civil penalties and costs. The court may make such additional orders or judgments, including restitution, as may be necessary for damages proximately caused by a violation of this section related to abortion-inducing drugs. It is not a defense to civil liability under this subsection (2) that a defendant has been acquitted or has not been prosecuted or convicted under this section or has been convicted of a different offense or of a different type or class of offense, for the conduct that is alleged to give rise to liability under this subsection (2). Civil actions provided under this subsection (2) are cumulative and do not preclude criminal prosecution.
Inspect this action on the timeline ↑Apr 6, 2026 · HB 1793 · Sales tax; exempt retail sales of firearm safes during annual Mississippi Second Amendment Weekend holiday. · SignedGovernor · HB 1793
Sales tax; exempt retail sales of firearm safes during annual Mississippi Second Amendment Weekend holiday.
Apr 6, 2026 · Signed
Gov. Tate Reeves · Signed
FactVote reviewed summary
Tate Reeves signed HB 1793. Tate Reeves signed HB 1793. 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.
Inspect this action on the timeline ↑Apr 6, 2026 · HB 1793 · Sales tax; exempt retail sales of firearm safes during annual Mississippi Second Amendment Weekend holiday. · EnactedMississippi 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.
Inspect this action on the timeline ↑Feb 12, 2026 · SB 2339 · Firearms; criminalize possession of by certain persons and order removal after a hearing with a specific finding of risk. · Died in committeeMississippi 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.
Inspect this action on the timeline ↑Feb 3, 2026 · SB 2815 · Storage of a firearm; create minimum duty of care and criminalize negligent storage. · Died in committeeMississippi 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.
Inspect this action on the timeline ↑Feb 3, 2026 · HB 123 · Medicaid; expand eligibility under federal Affordable Care Act. · Died in committeeMississippi 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.
Records come from published fact relationships or reviewed topic records with official supporting evidence and verified Mississippi officeholder attribution. Historical executive officials require evidence tied to the action date and are excluded from incumbent proposals. Inclusion follows an explicit topic review, a related state fact, or the action’s title and supporting evidence. Explicit topic reviews take priority; repeated actions use the most recent explicit review for this topic. Duplicate actions attached to several facts appear once. This topic match is not a new finding that an action caused a result, and the reviewed collection is selective. Collection reviewed Sep 16, 2026.
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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.
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.
1 proposalView proposals from Brice WigginsMississippi 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.
Mississippi House of Representatives, District 44 · R–MS
1 proposalView proposals from C. Scott BoundsMississippi 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.
U.S. House of Representatives, Mississippi District 2 · D–MS
1 proposalView proposals from Rep. Bennie G. ThompsonU.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.
Mississippi House of Representatives, District 94 · D–MS
1 proposalView proposals from Robert L. Johnson IIIMississippi 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.
2 proposalsView proposals from Sen. Cindy Hyde-SmithU.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.
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)..
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.
Sources & methods
Every section retains its primary sources, units, reporting periods and comparison limits. Maps, graphs and tables use the same observation and cohort. All 50 states are listed; D.C. and territories are excluded. Missing and suppressed values remain unavailable and never become zero.
#1 is the highest measured value. Equal source values share a rank and leave gaps (1, 2, 2, 4). Ranks use source precision and are descriptive, not a score of the state. Survey uncertainty and reporting coverage can limit comparisons. Published U.S. benchmarks are used where available; a state average is not substituted.
Mississippi snapshots and fiscal sources keep their own dates and accounting scope. National events and federal distribution explainers describe national context. Actions and statements are filtered to Mississippi, retain their reviewed evidence, and do not establish that a policy caused a measured change.
Retained state source collections assembled October 5, 2026. Original review and source dates remain visible. Refreshing this page does not refresh an official data release.