Connect with us

North Carolina

North Carolina Republicans seek control over state and local election boards ahead of 2024

Published

on

North Carolina Republicans seek control over state and local election boards ahead of 2024


RALEIGH, N.C. – Republicans who control the North Carolina legislature with veto-proof majorities are close to wresting supervision of elections from the governor and the governor’s party — almost always the Democrats for over a century.

A bill that could reach Gov. Roy Cooper’s desk this week would, among other changes, take away from him and future governors the power to appoint members of the State Board of Elections. It would give that authority to legislative leaders instead.

The legislation also could lead to the ouster of the top elections administrator ahead of the next presidential election in a state where former President Donald Trump squeezed out a razor-thin win over Democrat Joe Biden in 2020. North Carolina was Trump’s narrowest victory that year, raising hopes among Democrats that Biden could win there in 2024.

GOP attempts since 2016 to erode Cooper’s election board power have been struck down by courts or defeated by voters in a statewide referendum.

Advertisement

Cooper plans to veto the bill. But Republican majorities are large enough to override his veto, and Republican justices now have a majority on the state Supreme Court. Here is what the Republican legislation would do:

WHAT IS CURRENT LAW?

The State Board of Elections has five members appointed by the governor, a practice dating to 1901. While no more than three members can be from the same party, Democrats have held the majority during Cooper’s term as governor.

The board picks a chair and hires an executive director. Each of North Carolina’s 100 counties also has five-member election boards, which also follow the 3-2 split favoring Democrats. The state board and Cooper pick county members.

WHAT WOULD THE BILL DO?

Advertisement

Starting next July, the state board would grow to eight members, but all seats would be appointed through the General Assembly. The House speaker, Senate leader and the minority leaders in each chamber would get two picks each. The county boards next year would drop to four members, with each top lawmaker picking one seat.

Although unaffiliated voters could be appointed, it’s likely that the reconstituted boards would be evenly split between Democrats and Republicans. The new state board would pick a chair and an executive director, but one of the legislative leaders — both currently Republicans — would make the choice if the board can’t quickly agree on who should fill those positions.

WHY EVEN-NUMBERED BOARDS?

Republicans say the current makeup of the state and local boards means decisions on contentious election matters fall to what the governor’s party wants, fueling public suspicions that results can’t be trusted. Under the GOP proposal, bill sponsors say the boards will be forced to find bipartisan consensus, increasing voter confidence.

“All we can do is design a board that is intended to take folks who are on it, who have partisanship leanings, and try to remove partisanship from the equation by requiring at least some bipartisan buy-in to do anything,” Republican Rep. Destin Hall said during a House committee meeting. An earlier version of the bill already cleared the Senate in June.

Advertisement

But Cooper, who is barred by term limits from running again in 2024, said in a recent op-ed that the bill has “deceptive packaging” that would constitute a “backdoor attempt to limit early voting and consolidate the legislature’s quest for the power to decide contested elections.”

Voting rights advocates point out that if boards are deadlocked on how many early in-person voting sites should be opened in a county, state law says the county can only offer one site, potentially leading to long lines in the larger cities.

A deadlock on most other issues would produce a standstill with no resolution.

COULD ELECTION RESULTS BE OVERTURNED?

State and county boards accumulate ballot results after elections and vote to certify the results so winning candidates can be seated. But what happens if a board is deadlocked on certifying a race?

Advertisement

Bill opponents worry that with evenly divided state and local election boards, some members might refuse to certify credible results, sending those matters to appellate courts or the General Assembly to settle. The legislation also could open the door for state lawmakers to determine the winner of the state’s 16 presidential electoral votes if a divided state board can’t agree to certify the winner.

The state constitution already gives the legislature the authority to determine the outcomes of what it calls a “contested election” for statewide positions such as governor, lieutenant governor and attorney general.

WHAT ABOUT THE STATE DIRECTOR?

Executive Director Karen Brinson Bell, who was hired by the board in 2019, is widely respected among her colleagues and serves as secretary of the National Association of State Election Directors. Under her watch, there have been no widespread problems or fraud.

But Brinson Bell has drawn criticism from state Republicans who accuse her and the state elections board of accepting a 2020 legal settlement that eased some rules for mailed ballots during the COVID-19 pandemic beyond what state law permitted. Brinson Bell defended the settlement, saying it helped legally cast mail-in ballots get counted after worries about postage delays during the pandemic.

Advertisement

The state board, with a Democratic majority, certified Trump’s 1.3 percentage point win in the state in 2020 without drama. By contrast, some Republicans on state certification boards refused or delayed certification in battleground states Trump lost.

The bill says if the newly constituted state board next summer can’t agree on who to hire as executive director by July 15, then the Senate’s Republican leader will make the pick. Under that scenario, a new state election director would be starting less than four months before the presidential election.

Sarah Walker, a consultant with the Washington, D.C.-based Bipartisan Policy Center, said Brinson Bell “has taken a comprehensive and thoughtful approach to elections administration.”

“If someone new was appointed in July, they could have potentially little to no experience running statewide elections, and I think that will open the door to potential confusion and increase the likelihood of mistakes and lack of clarity,” Walker added.

Hall, the Republican lawmaker, said he is confident the executive director the board hires would be experienced and respected, and it might even be Brinson Bell. But he said it’s important that the board make “bipartisan decisions moving forward into every election.”

Advertisement

IS THIS HAPPENING ELSEWHERE?

Across the country, concerns have been growing about partisans taking over control of election offices from the state to the local level, part of the fallout from the stolen election lies Trump and his allies have been repeating since his defeat.

Last week in Wisconsin, the Republican-controlled state Senate voted to fire state elections administrator Meagan Wolfe over decisions that were made by the state election board during the 2020 election and that she was obliged to carry out under state law. Wolfe is also widely respected and has overseen largely trouble-free elections in a state where multiple audits, reviews and recounts confirmed Biden’s win in 2020.

Democrats say the effort to remove her was improper, and a legal challenge has already been filed.

WHAT HAPPENS NEXT?

Advertisement

The North Carolina House has scheduled a floor vote for Tuesday, and the state Senate already has signaled support for the final measure. A vote to override Cooper’s expected veto might not happen until October and would likely be followed by a legal challenge.

Another election bill Cooper vetoed that is awaiting override votes in the legislature would overturn existing law that allows mailed ballots to be counted if they are postmarked by Election Day and received within three days. It also would allow partisan poll observers to move about voting locations, a provision critics say could lead to voter intimidation.

___

Associated Press writer Christina A. Cassidy in Atlanta contributed to this report.

Copyright 2023 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without permission.

Advertisement



Source link

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

North Carolina

North Carolina legislators leave after veto overrides, ballot question, unfinished business

Published

on

North Carolina legislators leave after veto overrides, ballot question, unfinished business


RALEIGH, N.C. (AP) — The North Carolina General Assembly wrapped up this year’s chief work session Thursday after overriding Democratic Gov. Roy Cooper’s vetoes, putting a constitutional amendment about citizens and voting on the November ballot and sending to Cooper’s desk many additional bills.

But during its two months of work, the Republican-dominated legislature stumbled by failing to pass a comprehensive budget-adjustment measure for the next 12 months. Attempts at putting additional constitutional referendums before voters fell short. And bills on other contentious topics didn’t get over the finish line.

“I wish we had been able to get more done. I think if we had gotten more done, we’d have a little more to talk about,” Senate leader Phil Berger told reporters after his chamber passed an adjournment resolution. But, Berger added, “there was a lot of productive activity that took place.”

The two chambers disagreed over how much more to spend for the fiscal year that began July 1. That included whether state employees and teachers should get raises that are higher than what were already planned in the second year of the already enacted two-year state budget.

Advertisement

And while the House and Senate managed to approve $67.5 million to help for six months child care centers at risk of closing after federal grants expire, they couldn’t agree on setting aside close to $500 million for scholarships and other funds for K-12 students to attend private schools or receive services. GOP leaders in the two chambers identified the funding as a leading priority to address a spike in applications — and children on waiting lists — this year after the General Assembly removed income limits to receive Opportunity Scholarships.

The Senate initially sent the House a standalone spending measure for those private-school programs, but House members wanted the private-school money accompanied by public school spending increases within a budget bill, House Speaker Tim Moore said. Now it looks like tens of thousands of families will miss out, at least in the short term.

“It would be a real shame and a missed opportunity if we don’t get those Opportunity Scholarship dollars out,” Moore told reporters earlier Thursday. “At the same time, we need to make sure we’re doing all that we can for our public schools.”

Moore said later Thursday he was hopeful that the money could still be approved in time for the school year.

Lawmakers will still get another crack at these and other matters. The General Assembly formally agreed to reconvene occasional short sessions for the rest of the year, mainly to address veto overrides or emergencies. But they also could deal with larger matters.

Advertisement

The Republican leadership succeeded Thursday by overriding Cooper’s three vetoes so far this year, extending a winning streak dating back to last year, when all 19 of Cooper’s vetoes were overturned. The GOP holds small veto-proof majorities in each chamber. Following votes on Wednesday in the House, the Senate completed the overrides of measures that alter the state’s face masking policy, youth prosecutions and billboard maintenance rules.

The constitutional amendment heading to the ballot seeks to change language in the state constitution to clarify that only U.S. citizens at least 18 years of age and meeting other qualifications shall be entitled to vote in elections. Voting by noncitizens is already illegal, but some supporters of the amendment say the current language in the constitution could be challenged so that other people beside citizens could vote.

Other amendment questions only passed one chamber. The House approved an amendment that attempts to repeal a literacy test for registering to vote that was used for decades to prevent Black residents from casting ballots. It became unlawful under the federal Voting Rights Act of 1965 and has been unenforceable. The Senate also approved a bill with two amendments — one to lower the cap on income tax rates from 7% to 5% and a second to make clear photo voter ID also applies to mail-in voting.

Legislators did have bipartisan successes in the final days. They sent to Cooper bills that would create new sex exploitation and extortion crimes and that would help combat human trafficking. And the two chambers backed a compromise measure that will allow the resumption of the automatic removal of criminal charges that are dismissed or that result in “not guilty” verdicts. Such removals had been suspended since August 2022 while problems carrying out the expunctions got resolved.

But negotiators failed to hammer out a final bill that would force sheriffs and jailers to comply with federal immigration requests to hold inmates believed to be in the country illegally. The House and Senate couldn’t resolve what to do about a sheriff who still failed to comply, said Sen. Danny Britt, a Robeson County Republican and negotiator.

Advertisement

And an effort by the Senate to authorize the legal use of marijuana for medicinal purposes didn’t get traction among enough House Republicans, even when the Senate attached it to another measure that placed tough restrictions on federally legal hemp products.

__

Associated Press writer Makiya Seminera contributed to this report.





Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

North Carolina

Apple Delays Build Of Taxpayer-Subsidized North Carolina Campus

Published

on

Apple Delays Build Of Taxpayer-Subsidized North Carolina Campus


Apple Inc. appears to be delaying its plans to build a corporate campus in Research Triangle Park, which is sited on the boundaries of Raleigh, Chapel Hill and Durham in North Carolina.

Construction was originally slated to begin in 2026, but the tech giant has reportedly told state officials of its desire to delay groundbreaking for up to four years. The delay would be a considerable setback for the area, which anticipated substantial economic growth and job creation from the project.

Advertisement

The first phase of the project was expected to include six buildings across 41 acres, with a promise of a future expansion on a 281 acre site. The proposed project was intended to house roles in machine learning, artificial intelligence, and software engineering, with estimates of 3,000 jobs with salaries approaching $200,000.

As the region grapples with news of the delay, the broader implications in terms of economic development are somewhat less clear. The taxpayer-funded incentives bound up in the project may have made the development less of an unalloyed positive for North Carolinians.

Massive Taxpayer Contributions

The cost to North Carolina for securing Apple’s investment was substantial, with $845.8 million in tax breaks promised over 39 years and local incentives adding another $20 million. The all-in cost to taxpayers totaled nearly $1 billion, or roughly $333,000 per job added.

For context, this is just a few thousand dollars shy of a noted tax incentive boondoggle: the “border war” between Kansas City between Missouri and Kansas. There, some 414 jobs were created in Kansas at a cost of $340,000 per job.

Advertisement

The track record of the Job Development Investment Grant Program, which would facilitate the tax breaks accruing to Apple, has been mixed at best. Notable projects that have also been pushed back by the recipients of tax incentives include an agreement with Allstate to create 2,200 jobs which was made impractical by a shift to remote work and a commitment by a Vietnamese automaker to create 7,500 jobs which has been delayed until 2025.

Apple’s decision to delay the construction of its Research Triangle Park campus brings into question the future economic impact on the Raleigh-Durham area—but it is far from clear the result will be a net negative for North Carolina taxpayers.

Tax Incentives and Job Creation

The efficacy of tax incentives in fostering job creation more broadly has been long debated. While incentives are often touted as necessary to attract large companies and thereby spur economic development, evidence has for some time suggested that they may not be as effective as advertised.

One main criticism is that the incentives often result in a relocating of existing jobs rather than the creation of new ones—put differently, there is no net addition of jobs to the economy writ large, merely a subtraction from one region or state and an addition in another. This can have beneficial local effects, but those effects may be blunted by the broader net loss inherent where an expenditure is made to maintain the same total number of jobs.

The practice of offering tax incentives leads to a zero-sum game, where cities or regions engage in a destructive bidding war, each vying to spend more taxpayer money to the benefit of no one save for the corporations being fought over.

Advertisement

In fact, research suggests that the primary drivers of job growth are not older firms—but young firms. This would suggest North Carolina would be better off incentivizing the next Apple to start its business in the Research Triangle, rather than trying to attract existing behemoths. Newer firms inject competition, spur innovation, and are more likely to hire new workers.

Thus, policies that support the creation of new businesses, rather than providing tax incentives to existing ones, may be more beneficial for long-term sustainable development—but they don’t make the headlines.



Source link

Continue Reading

North Carolina

Western NC child care facing severe cuts; Raleigh advances emergency funding

Published

on

Western NC child care facing severe cuts; Raleigh advances emergency funding


With 29% of North Carolina child care programs saying they would close with many in the west of the state eyeing deep cuts, legislators have advanced emergency funding before a June 30 fiscal cliff.

The N.C. State House voted late June 26 to allocate about $67 million for the first half of the July 1 fiscal year in a bill that must still be approved by the Senate. The move came as a 2021 program using hundreds of millions of dollars in federal pandemic aid to boost child care was set to end. The federally funded stabilization grants that were administered by the state helped provide more than 10,000 child care slots in Buncombe, Henderson and Madison counties, state data said.

The loss of the stabilization grants would mean the closure of 29% of child care programs statewide, according to a February N.C. Child Care Resource and Referral Council survey. A report on the survey, conducted by Well World Solutions, did not make clear how many Western North Carolina programs said they would close. The Citizen Times reached out to June 26 to Well World.

Marcia Whitney, president and CEO of Verner Center, which serves 232 children as young as infants at programs in Swannanoa and Emma Elementary, said they did not want to cut salaries or raise tuition. But would have to look at eliminating positions.

Advertisement

“Where do we have potential? Streamlining positions and obviously cutting expenses every other place we can,” Whitney told the Citizen Times four days before the funding cliff.

Those that don’t receive free or subsidized care at Verner pay a monthly tuition of $1,656 for children up to 3 years old and $1,206 for those 3 to 5 years old.

Advocates have been asking the General Assembly in Raleigh to maintain the funding. But the Republican-controlled Senate and House were at a budget impasse.

Greg Borom, director of the WNC Early Childhood Coalition, said he had hoped legislators would step away from other budget issues and pass some kind of separate funding.

Advertisement

“We really can’t go through the summer without our fragile child care landscape being stabilized,” Borom told the Citizen Times June 26.

The grants were created in 2021, when Democratic Gov. Roy Cooper announced that $805 million from the federal American Rescue Plan Act would be used to boost pay for child care workers, many of whom were quitting during the pandemic.

How grants affected local child care

The stabilization grants have supported more than 10,000 child care slots in Buncombe, Henderson and Madison counties, according to the N.C. Division of Child Development and Early Education.

  • Buncombe: 7,587 child care slots (1,022 staff positions supported)
  • Henderson: 4,079 child care slots (398 staff positions supported)
  • Madison: 231 child care slots (29 staff positions supported)

A 2023 N.C. Chamber Foundation survey found that 60% of parents with children who are ages 5 and younger said they had to miss work because of a problem with child care and 32% didn’t pursue job training or continued education because of a lack of affordable child care.

Despite the stabilization grants, some child care programs that have historically faced difficulties providing services in poorer areas, continued to struggle. In October of 2023 the nonprofit Southwestern Child Development closed seven programs in Cherokee, Clay, Graham, Haywood and Jackson counties. The nearly 300 children affected were were up to 5 years in age with most receiving free or subsidized care due to income.

Advertisement

As the grant money was set to run out in December 2023, advocates asked the legislature for $300 million. But the General Assembly came back with $100 million that extended the grants through June.

In his recommended budget for the fiscal year starting July 1, Cooper has said the state should add another $200 million. The House has proposed $135 million and the Senate $136.5 million in their opposing and deadlocked budget bills.

Isabel Taylor, director of Bells School in Fletcher, said because of her program’s small classes they charge a bit more than other centers. If the funding didn’t come they would likely have to raise rates, she said.

Taylor said her main concern was for centers that serve children coming from low-income households.

Advertisement

“If the state supports child care then they should support the centers that are serving the most needy children,” Taylor said. “The centers that serve 50% public assistance are the most deserving of help from the state.”

More: NC Health Dept: 7 Western North Carolina child care centers to close, lack of funding

More: Asheville school board chair backs historic change: pay, staffing, power for teachers

Joel Burgess has lived in WNC for more than 20 years, covering politics, government and other news. He’s written award-winning stories on topics ranging from gerrymandering to police use of force. Got a tip? Contact Burgess at jburgess@citizentimes.com, 828-713-1095 or on Twitter @AVLreporter. Please help support this type of journalism with a subscription to the Citizen Times.



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending