NATCHEZ — As the Mississippi Legislature’s 2009 session approaches its final weeks, local legislators still have plenty of opinions on the bills they’ve seen this year.

Legislators started the session facing a major budget deficit, but now, due to the federal stimulus package, an estimated $2.5 billion is coming to the state.

Here is a recap of how local officials feel about some of this year’s top issues:

Accepting stimulus money — House Concurrent Resolution 64

Gov. Haley Barbour has said he will reject approximately $56 million of stimulus money that would provide unemployment compensation to part-time workers.

The House has voted to bypass Barbour’s decision not to accept the money, and several Senate Democrats have filed a resolution urging the governor to take the money, but the chairman of the Senate rules committee has said he will not allow it on the floor for debate or a vote.

Rep. Robert Johnson, D-Natchez, said rejecting the unemployment money would hurt some Mississippians.

“Some people have two or three part-time jobs, when those lose their jobs, they should not be excluded,” Johnson said.

Sen. Kelvin Butler, D-Magnolia, agreed.

“I can’t see how in the world we can let that much money stay on the table,” Butler said.

Unemployment benefits only go to those who were working and were laid off because of no fault of their own, Butler said.

“These are not people who quit their job because they didn’t want to work anymore,” he said. “I think that not taking that money is the worst thing you can do at a time like this.”

But Rep. Sam Mims, R-McComb, hopes the state will think twice before accepting the money.

“It’s important that we move very cautiously to make sure there are no strings attached,” he said.

And Mims doesn’t want to see the state start depending on one-time money.

“We are only postponing tough decision for two or three years,” he said. “When the money runs out and we have all these new social programs because of the stimulus money, what are we going to do?

Require Voter identification — House Bill 1533

A bill to require voters to show a photo identification before voting in elections has once again died.

And efforts to revive it late last week ended in failure as well.

But Mims said legislators supporting voter ID made progress this session. The bill did pass the House, but failed to make it out of a Senate committee.

“I am 100 percent in favor of a photo ID (to vote),” Mims said. “I’m very disappointed that the voter ID bill has died. But many of us in the House will continue to bring this up.”

This year’s bill had three amendments that Mims did oppose. The bill exempted voter ID for those 65 and older. It allowed voters to register up to three days before the election. And it allowed some convicted felons to vote.

But the bill also included language that Butler thought key to its success.

“That was one measure I was really concerned about, making sure we have early voting,” Butler said. “If we are going to have voter ID (requirements) I think it is important we have early voting.”

Cockerham said she had several concerns about the bill. Most notably were the lack of exemptions for the disabled and elderly and the stipulation requiring uniform identification cards.

“When the bill was originally drafted a normal ID like a driver’s license would have served as identification,” Cockerham said. “Through an amendment, you would have to have gotten an ID through the Secretary of State’s office.

“That might not be a problem for me, but for someone elderly that might cause some concern.”

Cockerham said she would like to see a bill that included exemptions for people over 65 and for people with disabilities.

Johnson said he supports a requirement to have some form of ID, not necessarily photo.

“The majority of the population is perfectly comfortable with carrying ID,” he said.

Some debates over the voter ID issue have centered on making older, black voters carry ID, reminding them of the days of Jim Crow laws.

Johnson said he believes the debate has been blow out of proportion.

“I think this has been created a bigger issue than it is,” he said.

Prohibit traffic cameras — House Bill 1568

Lawmakers have sent a bill to the governor that prohibits the use of cameras to catch traffic law violators. The law applies to any state, county or municipal road.

A ticket is automatically sent to the violator, who is identified by the vehicle’s license plate.

The company that installs the cameras splits the ticket revenue with the city that has the cameras.

Barbour has yet to sign the bill, but if he does, all traffic cameras will have to be removed by Oct. 1.

The Natchez aldermen voted earlier this year to proceed with installing the cameras, but they haven’t yet been installed.

All but one local legislator voted to ban the cameras.

“I know Natchez was interested in those cameras, but after getting all of the data from all of my district, I had concerns that it was another attempt by law enforcement to raise money off of poor people,” Butler said.

The data Butler collected and reviewed did not seem to indicate that having traffic cameras really made anything safer, he said.

“One of the arguments for the cameras is that if people know the cameras are there they won’t run the red lights, but I think that if a police officer is there they won’t run a light either.”

Cockerham said overall she questions the legality of the cameras.

“I know the proponents say they are legal because there is no law saying they are illegal, but that is one of the reason’s the law needs to be changed,” she said.

Dearing supports the camera’s use, however, and believes the governor will veto the bill.

“(The cameras) have made me more cautious,” he said. “If I’m making a right turn at a red light, I’m going to make sure I come to a complete stop.”

And Dearing thinks once drivers start driving more cautiously, accidents and traffic related fatalities will go down.

Cigarette tax increase — House Bill 364

The Senate and the House have both passed increases to the state’s cigarette tax, but they’ve not yet agreed on the price.

The House has passed a bill that increased the state’s cigarette excise tax by $1. The Senate version was 49 cents.

The bill is in conference.

Of the local lawmakers, only Mims voted against the increase.

Mims said increasing taxes will not improve the state’s budget situation.

“Instead of raising taxes, we should take step back and reassess the role of state government,” he said. “In a recession, raising taxes simply to bring in new revenue is not effective.”

But other leaders want to see Mississippi’s tax closer to the price of other states.

“We’re still the lowest tax other than South Carolina,” Johnson said.

Currently, the tax is 18 cents per pack of cigarettes.

Johnson said he would like to raise the tax by between 10 and 15 cents.

Johnson said it’s important to keep the cigarette tax below Louisiana, and it’s especially important for Mississippi cities that are on the border of Louisiana.

Louisiana’s cigarette tax is 36 cents.

“My position from the beginning (is) that we should never be too much ahead of Louisiana,” Johnson said.

He said he doesn’t want to drive Mississippi smokers over to Louisiana.

Cockerham said that while the proposed tax increase would generate more revenue for the state, that is not the sole purpose behind the bill. She said the harmful effects of smoking are also on the minds of legislators.

“It will generate revenue, but it will also take into consideration health concerns,’ Cockerham said. “Smoking is the leading cause for many diseases. This bill is two fold in the fact that we want it to increase revenue and save lives too.”