Mississippi lawmakers on Thursday approved a reform bill that removes a provision requiring local governments to use opioid settlement funds for addiction prevention efforts. The agreement, reached by negotiators from the House and Senate, now leaves the decision of spending largely to local authorities.
The state has received more than $130 million since 2022 from lawsuits against pharmaceutical companies linked to over 10,000 overdose deaths in Mississippi since 1999. By 2040, the state expects to collect approximately $421 million. While all states received opioid settlement money, Mississippi is among the few that has not directed any of its funds toward overdose prevention, instead spending the majority on legal fees. Local governments have received at least $15.5 million, with over $4 million allocated to general expenses and less than $1 million spent on overdose prevention, according to Mississippi Today.
Earlier this month, House Public Health and Human Services Committee Chairman Sam Creekmore proposed legislation to require local funds to be used for public health measures. However, during negotiations on Thursday, the provision was removed after disagreements among lawmakers. Creekmore said he supported the measure but couldn’t secure consensus, and now cities and counties can continue using the funds for non-addiction purposes. Local governments are expected to receive more than $40 million in additional funds as the distribution continues.
Sen. Nicole Boyd, a Republican from Oxford and lead sponsor of the bill, said the legislation aims to improve oversight over how settlement money is spent. She noted that the funds allocated to local governments were intended as reimbursement for addiction-related expenses over the past two decades. The bill also seeks to give the Legislature more control over the advisory council and enhance transparency and ethics rules.
James Moore, a recovery advocate from Hattiesburg who lost his son to an overdose, expressed disappointment that lawmakers removed the restriction on spending funds solely on addiction. Moore, a member of the advisory council, said he believes public input would have supported maintaining the original intent of the lawsuit. Despite the setback, he welcomed the potential for some reforms to improve the state’s response to the opioid crisis.
