Connect with us

North Carolina

North Carolina Environmental Regulators at War Over Water Rules for “Forever Chemicals” – Inside Climate News

Published

on

North Carolina Environmental Regulators at War Over Water Rules for “Forever Chemicals” – Inside Climate News


The North Carolina Chamber of Commerce has privately leaned on the state’s powerful Environmental Management Commission to delay critical PFAS rules, emails obtained under state public records law show, including providing members with the résumé of a scientist who has downplayed the toxicity of the compounds.

At the same time, a crisis involving these “forever chemicals” emerged in rural Randolph County, where drinking water at an elementary school contained the compounds far above federal limits. The school’s groundwater is contaminated, among the issues the proposed rules are meant to address.

North Carolina became one of the nation’s hotspots for the compounds in 2017, when state regulators discovered chemical company Chemours had been discharging a type called GenX into the Cape Fear River, a major drinking water supply. 

More than 300 water systems in North Carolina, serving an estimated 3.4 million people—a third of the state’s population—provide drinking water that contains levels of PFAS above federal limits, according to the state Department of Environmental Quality. These include homes, schools, child care centers and mobile home parks.

Advertisement

Most of the public utilities source their drinking water from groundwater; the rest tap into lakes and rivers.

The Haw River, the drinking water supply for Pittsboro, feeds into Jordan Lake, a drinking water source for more than 700,000 people in central North Carolina. Both water bodies have been contaminated with “forever chemicals” from industries upstream. Credit: Lisa Sorg/Inside Climate News
The Haw River, the drinking water supply for Pittsboro, feeds into Jordan Lake, a drinking water source for more than 700,000 people in central North Carolina. Both water bodies have been contaminated with “forever chemicals” from industries upstream. Credit: Lisa Sorg/Inside Climate News

The drinking water for another 200,000 people who rely on private wells is also contaminated with PFAS at concentrations above the legal limit, DEQ figures show.

Alarmed by the toxicity and pervasiveness of the compounds, DEQ now wants to regulate eight PFAS compounds in surface water and groundwater in hopes of reducing levels before they flow from household taps.

Rulemaking requires several steps, including a public comment period and approval by the EMC before going into effect. The PFAS rules, introduced by DEQ in November, are stuck in an early phase of the process as they await votes from EMC committees.

Members of the public, including managers of downstream water treatment plants, have pleaded with the EMC to make progress. Some conservative EMC members have attributed delays to DEQ. They say the commission’s water quality and groundwater committees haven’t received a full analysis of the rules’ fiscal impacts.

Election 2024Election 2024

Explore the latest news about what’s at stake for the climate during this election season.

Advertisement

DEQ has given more than a half-dozen presentations to the EMC about the proposal since last year. The agency provided the EMC with a 72-page draft of the fiscal impacts of surface water rules in May. But the final version wasn’t delivered until July and ran 214 pages.

“We want to get the regulatory impact analysis as right as we can before it goes to the full commission and the public,” EMC Chairman J.D. Solomon told Inside Climate News, “so we can get good, meaningful comments back from the public.”

On March 27, Solomon, appointed by GOP House Speaker Tim Moore, spoke to the chamber’s environmental committee. Solomon told Inside Climate News this week that he discussed the EMC’s accomplishments over the past year. The topic of PFAS did come up, Solomon said, but none of the attendees asked for a delay.

“My main message to everybody is, ‘This is coming,’” Solomon said. “‘You’re not going to get out of it. You’re not going to run and hide.’”

Three weeks later, on April 22, the chamber sent a letter to DEQ Secretary Elizabeth Biser: “It is important that we do not hastily pass regulations without fully accounting for both the positive benefits and potential negative impacts … on the state and its business community.”

Advertisement

Since then, the chamber has provided the EMC with links to talking points about the benefits of PFAS. “This chemical family is essential to mobility, communication, medical treatment, and more,” the chamber wrote on its website, which features the headline: “When it comes to North Carolina’s water, let’s let science dictate our action, not politics.”

What Are Forever Chemicals?

There are more than 15,000 types of PFAS—per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, the so-called “forever chemicals.” They are found in many consumer products, such as microwave popcorn bags, pizza boxes, stain- and water-resistant clothing and furniture, and lithium-ion batteries, including those used in electric vehicles.

They’ve been linked to many serious health conditions, including several types of cancer.

PFAS also disrupt the ocean’s ability to sequester carbon, a driver of climate change. PFAS manufacturers emit thousands of tons of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere each year. 

In 2022, the Chemours Fayetteville plant emitted 52,000 tons of greenhouse gases, according to EPA data.

Advertisement

In May, Jake Cashion, the chamber’s vice president of government affairs, sent members a résumé for scientist Michael Dourson, who has been retained by chemical companies for studies downplaying the toxicity of the compounds. 

Dourson was also former President Donald Trump’s nominee to head the Environmental Protection Agency’s Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention. Dourson withdrew his name from consideration after it became clear the U.S. Senate would not confirm him. 

Cashion did not respond to a request for comment from Inside Climate News. Asked via email if the chamber had hired Dourson, and if so, in what capacity, the organization’s spokesperson did not respond.

Solomon said it’s routine for the EMC to “consider different experts” but that he has “not seen anything come to the commission” directly from Dourson.

In June, Dourson wrote an article for the Carolina Journal, a publication of the conservative John Locke Foundation, in which he wrote that North Carolinians faced “little to no risk” from PFAS in their drinking water. 

Advertisement

That contradicts findings by the EPA, federal toxicologists and independent scientists, who have linked PFAS exposure to kidney, prostate, breast, pancreatic and testicular cancer; thyroid and liver disorders; decreased fertility and low birth weight; ulcerative colitis; and a depressed immune system.

The North Carolina Manufacturers Alliance, whose members include Chemours, also opposes the draft rules, which don’t prohibit PFAS manufacturing, but only require facilities to keep the chemicals out of water supplies.

“The NCMA would like the State of North Carolina to be consistent in regulating these substances with our neighboring states and the federal rules, so as to not place North Carolina manufacturers at a competitive disadvantage in cost of manufacturing our products and expanding our operations,” the alliance wrote to DEQ and the EMC.

However, no neighboring states have enacted groundwater rules, according to DEQ. Nineteen other states have some type of groundwater guidance in place. 

The EMC in July instructed DEQ to remove five of eight compounds from its proposed groundwater standards. The remaining three, GenX, PFOA and PFOS, will be considered in September.

This story is funded by readers like you.

Our nonprofit newsroom provides award-winning climate coverage free of charge and advertising. We rely on donations from readers like you to keep going. Please donate now to support our work.

Advertisement

Donate Now

Solomon said the proposed standards for the removed compounds were more lax than existing ones, which depend on the lowest level a laboratory can detect. Those are known as practical quantitation levels, and can vary among laboratories, whose sensitivities differ. That can create regulatory uncertainty for industries.

Michael Ellison, an environmental consultant and vice-chairman of the EMC’s Water Quality Committee, has downplayed concerns about PFAS contamination—both privately and publicly.

In private, according to the emails obtained under state records law, Ellison dismissed concerns about the delays, telling a concerned resident in late June that “PFAs have been around for several decades, so any potential cost from another month or two to get the regulations right are likely to be incalculably small.”

Advertisement

At an EMC meeting on July 10, Ellison questioned their toxicity. “There is some difference of opinion about safe levels,” Ellison said, reinforcing points made by Dourson. “For decades we’ve been making and discharging this stuff. How many people have died from PFAS poisoning?” 

Contacted by Inside Climate News, Ellison did not elaborate on his comments.

Ellison worked at DEQ under Republican Gov. Pat McCrory’s administration, when the agency weakened many environmental rules. He left the agency in 2017 after Democratic Gov. Roy Cooper was elected. 

GOP Senate leader Phil Berger appointed Ellison to the EMC in 2023.

DEQ Secretary Elizabeth Biser has urged the Environmental Management Commission to hasten its rule-making on “forever chemicals” in surface water and groundwater. Credit: DEQDEQ Secretary Elizabeth Biser has urged the Environmental Management Commission to hasten its rule-making on “forever chemicals” in surface water and groundwater. Credit: DEQ
DEQ Secretary Elizabeth Biser has urged the Environmental Management Commission to hasten its rule-making on “forever chemicals” in surface water and groundwater. Credit: DEQ

The disagreement over PFAS rules escalated last month between Secretary Biser, appointed by Cooper, and conservative members of the EMC. Biser publicly criticized the group’s repeated delays, telling the media on a call: “Do they really need to count body bags before they take action?” 

Commissioner Charlie Carter, an air quality specialist and another Berger appointee, called for her resignation. “Biser’s conduct is absolutely OUTRAGEOUS … time for Biser to apologize or resign!” Carter wrote in an email to his fellow commissioners on July 14.

Advertisement

Chairman Solomon tried to rein Carter in.

“Charlie, This is over the top. No personal comments are needed on fellow Commissioners, DEQ staff, or DEQ Secretary. Stop it now,” Solomon wrote in an email to the full EMC.  “Everyone, Let’s make these emails stop. Focus on the technical and rulemaking process. We are getting this done—together.”

Biser responded to Carter’s email in a statement provided to Inside Climate News. “It’s my duty as Secretary to protect the health of North Carolina residents and these standards are critical to reducing PFAS in our surface water and groundwater and ensuring residents aren’t paying the entire cost of meeting drinking water standards,” Biser said. 

PFAS in an Elementary School’s Water

Farmer Elementary School near Asheboro, in Randolph County, serves 215 students in kindergarten through fifth grade, about half of them economically disadvantaged. The school sources its drinking water, used to quench the thirst of young children, cook school lunches and make staff coffee, from two wells drilled more than 30 years ago.

In June, DEQ tested the school’s drinking water as part of the agency’s routine assessment to help public water systems comply with EPA limits. The results were stunning. 

Advertisement

Of the 14 types of PFAS detected in Farmer Elementary’s drinking water, two of the most toxic—PFOS and PFOA—were detected at levels 144 and 233 times greater than federal limits, respectively. 

Groundwater contaminated with “forever chemicals” tainted the drinking water at Farmer Elementary School near Asheboro, in rural Randolph County. State officials are helping the school district source clean water. Credit: Lisa Sorg/Inside Climate News

That was driven by contamination in one of the school’s wells, since disconnected. It contained  PFOS at 400 times the proposed state groundwater standards.

A second well on the property also contains several types of PFAS, but only one is above federal limits.

Both the school district and the Randolph County Health Department sent letters to parents and staff about the contamination. DEQ is working with the school on ensuring a new water supply is safe, an agency spokesman said; school starts Aug. 26.

Advertisement
Farmer Elementary School relies on groundwater for drinking water, which is stored in this tower. Credit: Lisa Sorg/Inside Climate NewsFarmer Elementary School relies on groundwater for drinking water, which is stored in this tower. Credit: Lisa Sorg/Inside Climate News
Farmer Elementary School relies on groundwater for drinking water, which is stored in this tower. Credit: Lisa Sorg/Inside Climate News

DEQ is still investigating the source and the scope, according to an agency spokesperson. It’s unclear how long children and staff have been drinking contaminated water. 

A commercial site west of the school also had elevated levels of PFAS in its wells, but regulators have not pinpointed a source. Since the compounds linger in the environment for hundreds or even thousands of years, the source of the contamination could pre-date both the school and the business.

Therese Vick, research director with the Blue Ridge Environmental Defense League, told Inside Climate News that “the results were shocking and devastating.” 

The cost of providing clean water to North Carolinians whose drinking water supplies are contaminated—and determining who will pay for that treatment—lies at the heart of the fiscal analysis that the EMC committees are now considering.

The Office of State Budget and Management found the groundwater rules’ financial impact would yield net benefits of $604,000 to $3.3 million over 10 years.

An analysis of surface water standards released in July by the office shows that by the year 2060, industrial dischargers and publicly owned wastewater treatment plants would spend $9.6 billion to comply with the new rules.

Advertisement

But accounting for the savings—for water treatment plants and private well owners, health costs and property values—benefits would total $9.96 billion over the same time period. This represents a net surplus of $460,000.

Without the standards, according to DEQ, the health impacts across North Carolina through mid-century would equate to 44,925 cases of health harms. Of these cases, the agency estimated 10,279 could result in death. 

Marion Deerhake, a Cooper appointee, has been on the EMC for seven years, as the scope of contamination and dangers of PFAS in North Carolina have become clearer and more urgent.

“How many more meetings before we act?” Deerhake said at the July meeting. “It must be frustrating for people of the state who have suffered for years, having persistent toxic chemicals in their drinking water.”

About This Story

Perhaps you noticed: This story, like all the news we publish, is free to read. That’s because Inside Climate News is a 501c3 nonprofit organization. We do not charge a subscription fee, lock our news behind a paywall, or clutter our website with ads. We make our news on climate and the environment freely available to you and anyone who wants it.

Advertisement

That’s not all. We also share our news for free with scores of other media organizations around the country. Many of them can’t afford to do environmental journalism of their own. We’ve built bureaus from coast to coast to report local stories, collaborate with local newsrooms and co-publish articles so that this vital work is shared as widely as possible.

Two of us launched ICN in 2007. Six years later we earned a Pulitzer Prize for National Reporting, and now we run the oldest and largest dedicated climate newsroom in the nation. We tell the story in all its complexity. We hold polluters accountable. We expose environmental injustice. We debunk misinformation. We scrutinize solutions and inspire action.

Donations from readers like you fund every aspect of what we do. If you don’t already, will you support our ongoing work, our reporting on the biggest crisis facing our planet, and help us reach even more readers in more places?

Please take a moment to make a tax-deductible donation. Every one of them makes a difference.

Thank you,

Advertisement



Source link

Advertisement

North Carolina

North Carolina Rep. Valerie Foushee holds narrow lead over challenger Nida Allam

Published

on

North Carolina Rep. Valerie Foushee holds narrow lead over challenger Nida Allam


Nida Allam in 2022; Rep. Valerie Foushee (D-NC) in 2025.

Jonathan Drake/Reuters; Andrew Harnik/Getty Images


hide caption

Advertisement

toggle caption

Jonathan Drake/Reuters; Andrew Harnik/Getty Images

Incumbent Rep. Valerie Foushee holds a narrow lead over challenger Nida Allam in the Democratic primary for North Carolina’s 4th Congressional district as ballots continue to be counted.

In a race seen as an early test of whether Democratic voters desire generational change within the party, Foushee holds a lead of just over 1,000 votes with 99% of results in so far, according to the Associated Press.

Advertisement

Under state law, provisional votes will be counted in the coming days in a district that includes Durham and Chapel Hill. If the election results end up within a 1% margin, Allam could request a recount.

Successfully ousting an incumbent lawmaker is often extremely difficult and rare. However, there have been recent upsets in races as some voters are calling for new leaders and several sitting members of Congress face primary challengers this cycle.

Allam, a 32-year-old Durham County Commissioner, is running to the left of Foushee, 69, framing her candidacy as part of a broader rejection of longtime Democratic norms.

On the campaign trail, Allam ran on an anti-establishment message, pledging to be a stronger fighter than Foushee in Congress, both in standing up against President Trump’s agenda and when pushing for more ambitious policy.

Advertisement

“North Carolina is a purple state that often gets labeled red, but we’re not a red state,” she told NPR in an interview last month, emphasizing the need to address affordability concerns. “We are a state of working-class folks who just want their elected officials to champion the issues that are impacting them.”

She drew a contrast with the congresswoman on immigration, voicing support for abolishing U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Foushee has declined to go that far, advocating instead for ICE to be defunded and for broader reforms to the federal immigration system.

Allam also clashed with Foushee over U.S. policy towards Israel. As a vocal opponent of Israel’s war in Gaza, Allam swore off campaign donations from pro-Israel lobbying groups, such as AIPAC, and repeatedly criticized Foushee for previously accepting such funds.

Though Foushee announced last year that she would not accept AIPAC donations this cycle, she and Allam continued to spar over the broader role of outside spending in the race.

Their matchup comes four years after the candidates first squared off in 2022, when Allam lost to Foushee in what became the most expensive primary in the state’s history, with outside groups spending more than $3.8 million.

Advertisement

However, this year is poised to break that record. Outside groups have reported spending more than $4.4 million on the primary matchup, according to Federal Election Commission filings.

WUNC’s Colin Campbell contributed to this report.



Source link

Continue Reading

North Carolina

Building for tomorrow’s storms: North Carolina updates flood strategy

Published

on

Building for tomorrow’s storms: North Carolina updates flood strategy


North Carolina is beginning to plan for floods that have not happened yet.

State officials this year advanced the next phase of the state’s Flood Resiliency Blueprint, incorporating updated modeling that factors in heavier rainfall, future development and sea-level rise — a shift away from relying solely on historic data and FEMA’s regulatory maps.

“We can make decisions and plan for that future, not just the exposure to flooding that we see now,” said Stuart Brown, who manages the Flood Resiliency Blueprint for the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality.

For a state that has endured record-breaking rainfall from Hurricane Helene in the mountains to Tropical Storm Chantal in the Triangle, the move reflects a growing recognition: past standards no longer capture present risk.

Advertisement

Beyond outdated flood lines

Multiple North Carolina studies have found that between 43% and 60% of flood damage occurs outside FEMA’s regulatory flood zones. Those maps shape insurance requirements and local zoning decisions, yet they are largely based on historical rainfall data.

“A lot of the regulatory floodplains really haven’t kept up with what we know is happening,” said Elizabeth Losos, executive in residence at Duke University’s Nicholas Institute for Energy, Environment and Sustainability.

Climate data show rainfall intensity in the Triangle has increased by about 21% since 1970. Warmer air holds more moisture, fueling heavier downpours that overwhelm drainage systems designed for a different climate.

“Fixing what we know is flooding right now is good,” Losos said. “It’s better than nothing, but it’s definitely not enough.”

Brown said the blueprint incorporates projections for future precipitation and development — a critical factor in one of the fastest-growing states in the country.

Advertisement

“Development can be an issue for flooding in two categories,” Brown said. “One is when that development is occurring in areas that are flood prone. The other is when that development is done in ways that don’t account for the additional stormwater that will be produced.”

Thousands of projects, limited dollars

Unlike states that rely on massive levee systems, North Carolina’s flood risk is scattered across river basins, coastal plains and rapidly developing suburbs. Brown said resilience here will require thousands of localized projects.

“We were asked by the General Assembly to provide specific, actionable projects,” Brown said. “We want to know what specific geography and what specific action is proposed.”

That planning push comes as federal support for flood research and mitigation is shrinking.

The Trump administration has proposed a roughly 30% cut to NOAA’s 2026 budget, targeting climate research and ocean services that provide the rainfall and coastal data states use to model flood risk. At FEMA, the administration has cut staff by more than 6%, reduced funding for local hazard mitigation projects and added new approval layers for grants.

Advertisement

For North Carolina, that means fewer dollars for buyouts, drainage upgrades and flood control projects — and less federal data to guide long-term planning — just as the state is trying to build a more forward-looking flood strategy.

Brown said North Carolina is trying to “leverage the limited dollars that we have in the state with any federal sources that are available” and embed resilience into routine investments in transportation, water treatment and conservation.

“Funding is always going to be an issue,” Brown said.

The policy gap

Researchers have long argued that resilience investments save money. Studies show every $1 spent on mitigation can yield $4 to $13 in avoided losses.

“The problem is that the policies don’t align the people who pay the cost with the people who get the benefit,” Losos said.

Advertisement

A developer may not directly benefit from downstream flood reduction. A town may shoulder upfront infrastructure costs while insurers, neighboring communities or future taxpayers capture part of the savings.

Without policy changes that align costs and benefits, resilience can remain politically and financially difficult.

“In the most severe cases, there are some communities that will have to eventually abandon if they don’t begin to think about how they can adapt to these conditions,” Losos said.

North Carolina now has updated tools to better measure future flood risk. Whether the state can secure stable federal support — and align its own policies with the risks ahead — will determine how effectively communities prepare for the next storm rather than recover from the last one.

Advertisement



Source link

Continue Reading

North Carolina

North Carolina primary could mean Roy Cooper vs Michael Whatley in pivotal fall Senate race

Published

on

North Carolina primary could mean Roy Cooper vs Michael Whatley in pivotal fall Senate race


RALEIGH, N.C. — North Carolina’s primary will be the official starting gun for one of the country’s most closely watched U.S. Senate campaigns, likely pitting former Democratic Gov. Roy Cooper against former Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Whatley.

Each candidate is the most high-profile contender for their party’s nomination, which should be sealed on Tuesday. Scores of other races also are on the ballot, including for the U.S. House, state legislature and judicial seats.

North Carolina, a traditional battleground where Democrats have been able to hold the governor’s seat even as voters helped send President Donald Trump to the White House, is one of three states kicking off this year’s midterm elections, along with Texas and Arkansas. Tuesday’s slate of primaries comes against the backdrop of the U.S. and Israel attack on Iran.

The war, which began over the weekend, has killed at least six U.S. service members, spiraled into a regional confrontation as Iran retaliated and sent oil and natural gas prices soaring. The president, who campaigned on an isolationist “America First” agenda and went to war without authorization from Congress, faces mounting questions over its rationale and an exit strategy.

Advertisement

North Carolina’s election this year could be crucial for determining which party controls the U.S. Senate, where Republicans currently have the majority. The seat is open because Sen. Thom Tillis decided to retire after clashing with President Donald Trump. Political experts say a typhoon of outside money could make the race the most expensive Senate campaigns in U.S. history, perhaps reaching $1 billion.

Many Democrats see Cooper, who served two terms as governor and has been successful in state politics for decades, as the party’s best shot at victory. Democrats need to pick up four seats to take back control of the Senate, and they view the most likely path as winning in North Carolina, Maine, Alaska and Ohio.

Cooper faces five lesser-known rivals on Tuesday. Other Republicans on the Senate ballot include Navy officer Don Brown and Michele Morrow, who was the party’s nominee for state schools chief in 2024.

Republican U.S. Senate candidate Michael Whatley, arrives to an early voting site to cast his vote on Thursday, Feb. 12, 2026, in Gastonia, N.C. Credit: AP/Erik Verduzco

Cooper formally entered the race weeks after Tillis announced last summer he wouldn’t seek a third term, as did Whatley, who was buoyed by Trump’s backing when the president’s daughter-in-law Lara Trump declined to enter. The two candidates have been campaigning for months against each other with little focus on intraparty opposition.

Advertisement

Whatley promises to keep pushing Trump’s agenda if elected, one that he says has cut taxes and spending and restored U.S. military might.

“It’s very important for us to have a conservative champion and for President Trump to have an ally in the Senate,” he said while voting early in Gastonia. “We’re going to be fighting for every family and every community in North Carolina.”

Some primary voters say Congress needs Democratic control as a counterweight to Trump and what they consider disastrous policies.

President Donald Trump listens as Michael Whatley speaks to soldiers...

President Donald Trump listens as Michael Whatley speaks to soldiers and their families at Fort Bragg, N.C., Friday, Feb. 13, 2026. Credit: AP/Matt Rourke

“I think we need to send a message. And I think the more Democrats that show up, and the more independents that show up for this midterm election, and the more seats we can take from the Republicans, the more he might get the message,” said Lisa Frucht, 67, said as she cast a ballot for Cooper at an early voting site north of Raleigh.

Republican voter Gary Grimes, who chose Whatley, said Democratic control of Congress could lead to more impeachment efforts against Trump that ultimately won’t succeed.

Advertisement

“It’ll be a repeat of what they did to Trump in the first term,” said Grimes, 71, “And they can’t see anything except getting Trump, at any cost.”

A Democrat hasn’t won a Senate race in North Carolina since 2008. Meanwhile, Cooper, 68, hasn’t lost a North Carolina election going back to first running for the state House in the mid-1980s, leading to 16 years as attorney general and eight as governor through 2024.

Whatley, 57, previously worked in President George W. Bush’s administration, for then-North Carolina Sen. Elizabeth Dole and as an energy lobbyist.

Cooper and his allies have centered campaign attacks on Whatley’s allegiance to the president and Trump policies, saying he backs higher tariffs and Medicaid spending reductions and must take blame for slow Hurricane Helene recovery aid.

Voting recently in Raleigh, Cooper said he wants to “make sure that I’m a strong, independent senator who can work with this president when I can, stand up to him when I need to and recognize that people are struggling right now.”

Advertisement

Whatley, Trump and other Republicans have blistered Cooper on criminal justice matters, accusing him of promoting soft-on-crime policies while governor. They’ve repeatedly highlighted last August’s fatal stabbing of Ukrainian refugee Iryna Zarutska on a Charlotte light-rail train. Trump identified Zarutska’s mother in attendance at last week’s State of the Union address.

Cooper told reporters recently that his career is about “prosecuting violent criminals and keeping thousands of them behind bars.”

Tuesday’s election also includes primary elections in all but one of North Carolina’s U.S. House districts. They include a five-candidate GOP primary in the northeastern 1st Congressional District, which is currently represented by Democratic Rep. Don Davis, who faced no primary opposition.

The Republican-controlled General Assembly created last fall a more right-leaning 1st District to join Trump’s multistate redistricting campaign ahead of the 2026 elections to retain the House. Davis won in 2024 by less than 2 percentage points.



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending