Search Results

There couldn’t be a more compelling example of the urgency to vote in the upcoming midterm election than President Trump’s recent threats to overturn the 14th Amendment to the United States Constitution with an executive order. This is America’s foundational document. A change can only be initiated by two-thirds majorities of Congress or the states and can only take effect after three-fourths of the states have ratified it. There is no path for a president to change the Constitution. Yet this president boldly asserts that he can. The founders anticipated someone like our current president being elected, and built checks on runaway executive power into the Constitution by setting up co-equal branches of government. They never anticipated one of those branches, Congress, would forgo exercising that power. Yet, to date, the Republican-controlled House and Senate have shown little inclination to challenge President Trump. That’s something North Carolina voters need to keep in mind when they select the 13 men and women from this state who will represent us in Congress come Nov. 6. With the Republicans in control of the executive branch, Congress and now the majority on the Supreme Court, there is grave concern that the current president believes and demonstrates he is in control of the entirety of government. Additionally, he attacks the free press calling it the “enemy of the people” and attacks all of his critics and anyone who challenges his authority. He attacks the nation’s historical allies, embraces the authoritarian regime in Russia, tells lies continuously and threatens to end the probe that is investigating him and his presidential campaign. With the control that our 45th president holds over the branches of government that are designed to provide checks and balances, we have the makings of a government where far too much power rests in the hands of one man. A dictatorship is an authoritarian form of government where power rests with one ruler. Today there are at least 24 dictatorships in the world. The United States is not one of them. But the very fact that some now worry that what might once have seemed inconceivable is even remotely possible is alarming in and of itself. Many would argue that a dictatorship cannot happen in America. Author Jim Powell a Senior Fellow at the Cato Institute outlines eight points that can lead a nation towards an authoritarian form of government: Bad economic policies and foreign policies can cause crises that have dangerous political consequences. Politicians commonly demand arbitrary power to deal with a national emergency and restore order, even though underlying problems are commonly caused by bad government policies. In hard times, many people are often willing to go along with and support terrible things that would be unthinkable in good times. Those who dismiss the possibility of a dictatorial regime in America need to consider possible developments that could make our circumstances worse and politically more volatile than they are now – like runaway government spending, soaring taxes, more wars, inflation and economic collapse. Aspiring dictators sometimes give away their intentions by their evident desire to destroy opponents. There’s no reliable way to prevent bad or incompetent people from gaining power. A political system with a separation of powers and checks & balances – like the U.S. Constitution – does make it more difficult for one branch of government to dominate the others. Ultimately, liberty can be protected only if people care enough to fight for it, because everywhere governments push for more power, and they never give it up willingly. By this standard, a president who starts tariff wars with China and threatens to undo Constitutional amendments raises alarms. Add to that a Congress whose spending policies increased the deficit by 14 percent in 2017 and there’s real cause for worry. With the pending election, it is imperative that Americans vote and elect candidates who will protect our republic that has long been a beacon of hope and leadership for the world. Elections have consequences and those elected provide the direction for the nation. And yes, every vote counts. Our president has demonstrated that if things are not going his way, it is a conspiracy of the deep state. Examples include the “rigged’’ 2016 election when the polls indicated he would not win the presidency. He did not believe the unemployment numbers during the past administration, arguing that they were fake. When the numbers continued to improve during his administration, they were the best ever. We have had imperfect and untruthful leaders before, but they’ve been held in check by our system of government with its separation of powers. Never in recent history has that system felt more fragile. The election of greater consequence is the 2020 presidential election. If the current president loses the 2020 election, will he accept the results or will he refuse to vacate the office, saying the election was rigged? What as a nation do we do at that time with a president who exerts control over the Congress and the Supreme Court and drives the nation into a perilous constitutional crisis? As the Cato Institute’s Powell pointed out, liberty can only be protected if people care enough to fight for it. Now more than ever, it’s critical to care enough to become informed and vote.

Our nation marked the 50th anniversary of the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King’s assassination on April 4, just days after a group of teenagers from Marjory Stoneman High School in Parkland, Florida, organized hundreds of thousands of people in the March 24 “March for Our Lives” nationwide protests against gun violence. On February 14, a gunman killed 17 people and injured another 17 at Marjory Stoneman. Nikolas Cruz, 19, has been charged. Within 6 weeks, students from Stoneman organized hundreds of thousands of people at more than 800 nationwide protests, including the Washington, DC, march that brought together 800,000. Statewide, thousands marched in Asheville, Raleigh, Wilmington and elsewhere. The “March for Our Lives” movement faces gun control opponents, particularly the National Rifle Association. Conservatives in the news media and social media trolls have ridiculed the massacre survivors. Stoneman student Kyle Kashuv has emerged as an outspoken pro-Second Amendment advocate. But it’s easy to lay out dichotomies, color the nation in black and white along battle lines. That is the work of the nefarious Russian social media bots that spewed hate-filled messages bent on dividing Americans prior to the 2016 elections. They built on the worst in us, and America took the bait. It’s harder to seek and act on opportunities for change by using King’s principles. To make a difference, we don’t have to hate the people with whom we disagree. King describes this and other strategies for nonviolent resistance in his first book, “Stride Toward Freedom.” 1) Resist evil without resorting to violence. 2) Seek the “friendship and understanding” of the opponent, not to humiliate him. 3) Evil itself, not the people committing evil acts, should be opposed. 4) Suffer without retaliation as suffering itself can be redemptive. 5) Refuse to shoot the opponent; refuse to hate him. 6) Have a “deep faith in the future.” King, only 29 when he wrote “Stride,” had that faith in the future. As in King’s time, the Stoneman Douglas teenagers are building a movement on a shared cry for justice and outrage at a political system that has ignored them. To their credit, they haven’t aligned themselves with a particular political party. Instead, they call for Republicans and Democrats to come together: “We demand morally just leaders to rise up from both parties in order to ensure public safety.” To back that up, like King, they have made voter registration and voting one of the cornerstones of their movement for change. At “March for Our Lives” rallies, volunteers worked the crowds, registering young and old to vote. The students also have sponsored or have planned “Town Hall for Our Lives” with candidates in cities and towns statewide, including Wilmington, Hickory, Greensboro, and Raleigh. While thousands of North Carolina students have walked out of class, marched, and organized to demand tighter gun control laws, Republican legislators are unlikely to respond to the students’ call for change. To the contrary, they are more likely to loosen state gun laws. The “March for Our Lives” movement comes at a time in our state’s history when we have a Republican-held Legislature with a super majority holding enough votes to overrule Gov. Roy Cooper, a Democrat. But this could change. In past elections, where district lines have been drawn to heavily favor one party, the other party has failed to put forth a candidate. According to an analysis by the News and Observer, the 2016 general election included 73 districts in which just one of the major parties fielded a candidate. Republicans had no candidate in 30 House races and four Senate races; Democrats didn’t have a candidate in 28 House races and 11 Senate races. This year, both parties heavily recruited candidates. Some districts have more than one candidate from a particular party on the ballot. North Carolina holds primary elections May 8. For the first time in recent memory, Democrats and Republicans have filed to run for nearly all 170 state legislative seats. The 13 U.S. representatives from the state have filed for re-election. All of them have at least one opponent. “March for Our Lives” seeks to get younger voters to register and vote. There is tremendous opportunity for this generation to flex their muscles at the polls. This year, millennials will pass baby boomers as the largest generation of Americans eligible to vote, making up 34 percent of the voter-eligible population. Their challenge is to get these voters to the polls: Young voters historically vote at lower rates. But the angst of the young, like King and the Stoneman students, can fuel important social and political change. Now is the time for them, and for the rest of the state and nation, to seize this moment. The students also have hope—that their movement will make a difference. As history has shown, seizing power requires shrewd tactics fueled by passion and the persistence to see the fight through in the long term. These kids have their whole lives. As King wrote, “The universe is on the side of justice.” T

The violent events that transpired in Charlottesville were very disturbing and a terrible sign for our country and the nation. Three people lost their lives. Heather Heyer and Virginia State Troopers H. Jay Cullen and Berke Bates were killed during the hate-filled rally. We like to think that the great majority of Americans don’t exhibit the kind of hate we saw on full display in Charlottesville. We know there is racism and bigotry in our country. We witnessed the vile names former president Barack Obama was called, along with the bigotry towards his wife and children. We witnessed the shootings at the Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church in downtown Charleston, South Carolina, on the evening of June 17, 2015. During a prayer service, nine people (including the senior pastor, state Sen. Clementa C. Pinckney) were killed by gunman Dylann Roof, a 21-year-old white supremacist. Roof confessed to the shootings in hopes of starting a race war. And now Charlottesville. Three vivid examples of racial hate in our nation. Some have argued there are a small number of people who harbor these types of hate. Some argue that the election of America’s first black president was the tipping point for some who are concerned with losing the country. When we hear people say, “Take our country back,” the question is, take it back from whom? Other Americans? This is a dog-whistle for some that America should continue to be a white-ethnocentric nation. The truth is, the diversity in our nation makes us the most unique nation in the world and has led to America being the greatest nation the world has ever seen. The nation will continue to grow and become even more diverse. All we need do is look at the children being born in this nation. The Public School Review reports: “It has been an ongoing trend for nearly two decades—while the total number of students in American public schools has risen, the percentage of those students who are white has steadily fallen.” According to the Pew Research Center, in 1997, over 63 percent of the 46.1 million U.S. public school students were white. Today, white students comprise just 49.7 percent of the 50 million students enrolled.” This fact may contribute to the hysteria and hate of the alt-right, Nazi, white supremacist and KKK marchers as they shouted, “Jews will not replace us. Blacks will not replace us.” These comments from the marchers indicate an underlying fear that they are losing their position as the majority group in the United States and thus are espousing hate against Jews and blacks. When you evaluate hate groups in the United States, you may be surprised to know they reside in every state in the Union. Led by California’s 79 hate groups, the Southern Poverty Law Center reports there are 917 hate groups in the United States. Surprisingly South Carolina has a low number of 12 and Florida has 63. The growth of hate groups peaked in 2011 at 1,018 and declined by 25% or 234 in 2014; and grew by 133 groups or 17% in 2016. Mind you, these groups represent anti-Muslim, KKK, anti-government and black separatist groups. Hate is hate, regardless of who promotes it. The question is, what can be done about this, given the lack of moral leadership from our elected president and Congress? The answer is, we the people have to step up and hold our lawmakers accountable and replace them if they lack the moral courage to do what is right. We the people have to set the example of loving thy neighbor for our children, for young people and each other to build bridges of respect, while rejecting hate. We must join together with our work colleagues, our churches, our institutions of higher learning, our schools and our neighbors, and fellow countryman. We cannot afford to allow fringe groups to hijack our nation with hate. We have to show each other and the world that we are a nation of immigrants and we continue to be exceptional by resolving our differences in a respectful and collaborative way. We are an exceptional nation, and it is up to us to maintain our exceptionalism.

When Sayfullo Saipov careened down a bicycle path, killing eight people on Oct. 31, police had no trouble tracing the weapon he used, a Home Depot rental truck. But that task would likely have been considerably more challenging if Saipov had used a firearm. U.S. lawmakers, supported by the National Rifle Association, have enacted laws that hobble the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF) and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) when it comes to collecting and using information that could aid law enforcement and improve gun safety. As a result, an organization with a claimed membership of 5 million has managed to restrict information that affects the lives of almost 324 million Americans. Let’s start with the ATF. The bureau is precluded by law from creating a searchable database or registry of gun owners or firearm transactions. That’s right. Thanks largely to the lobbying efforts of the NRA, the ATF is required to scan records in such a way that they can’t be queried or turned into searchable files. That means that when it gets a request from a law enforcement agency trying to track a gun found at a crime scene, ATF staff members are, in essence, flipping through a file cabinet to learn where, when and to whom the gun was sold. Any system is subject to failure due to human error, as the Nov. 5 shooting at First Baptist Church in Sutherland Springs, Texas, demonstrates. The shooter had been convicted of assaulting his wife, which should have barred him from being able to own guns. But the Air Force has acknowledged that an officer failed to enter his domestic violence court-martial into a national database. That doesn’t mean the database shouldn’t exist. It isn’t just the ATF that is hobbled by such a completely indefensible law. Responding to pressure from the NRA, in 1996 Congress prohibited the CDC from funding public health research into firearms. When fatal car accidents occur, data about speed, age and sex of driver, seatbelt use, and numerous other variables go into a database maintained by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. Thanks in large part to that data, car safety standards have resulted in 27 percent fewer car deaths over the past few decades, according to a report in Wired magazine. The CDC’s National Center for Injury Prevention and Control exists to fund research into topics like suicide and domestic violence. If Congress didn’t forbid it from funding research into gun-related violence, it’s possible that the number of deaths from such incidents could be greatly reduced. When did we become a nation afraid of information that could save lives? We can only suppose that those who control the NRA fear such knowledge might result in a groundswell of support for severely restricting access to guns. But the U.S. Constitution affirms our right to own guns and the Supreme Court has said it is an individual right. A gun is a tool that can be used for numerous legitimate purposes, including self-defense, hunting and marksmanship. What’s needed are the kind of laws and safety standards that apply to other potentially deadly tools we use every day. Even with improved safety standards, cars killed more people in the U.S. than guns in 2013, by 33,804 to 33,636. The Oct. 31 murders-by-truck in New York City are a tragic reminder that cars have even become a weapon of choice in terrorist attacks. No one is talking about banning cars. But no reasonable person wants you to drive one unless it’s registered, you’re licensed and that information resides in a searchable database available to law enforcement. When NRA paranoia makes solving crimes and improving safety standards more difficult, it’s gone too far. How can such a small percentage of the population have the power to muzzle government agencies? Here’s how: The NRA spends millions of dollars to support the campaigns of candidates who agree with its positions. And two of the top current beneficiaries represent North Carolina. In October, the Raleigh News & Observer reported that only one of the 535 members of Congress has gotten more help from the NRA than Sen. Richard Burr and only three, including Burr, have gotten more than Sen. Thom Tillis. Both have perfect scores on NRA-backed legislation. Voting in lockstep with any powerful lobbying group, especially one as paranoid as the NRA, results in the greatest failure one can manifest as an elected representative — serving special interests at the expense of constituents, especially where health and safety are concerned. It’s time North Carolinians pressured their senators to put them first and lead the charge to reverse these unsupportable laws.

An historic evolution in how we get from Point A to Point B is set to take place over the next 20 years—the shift from fossil to alternative fuels for powering vehicles. What sort of fueling infrastructure will North Carolina need to support the demand? What role can public policy play? Light-duty vehicles, which include cars, produce most of the nitrogen oxides (NOx) emissions from mobile sources in North Carolina. NOx irritate the lungs and weaken the body’s defenses against respiratory infections such as pneumonia and influenza. They also contribute to formation of ground-level ozone and particulate matter. Increased use of alternative fuels over fossil fuels would improve human health and slow the effects of climate change. For this reason, China, India, France, Great Britain, the Netherlands and Norway plan to ban gas- and diesel-powered vehicles altogether. At the same time, the cost of building electric cars has been falling rapidly. They will become as cheap as gasoline-powered models by 2025, according to the 2017 Bloomberg New Energy Finance forecast. The sale of electric cars will overtake that of fossil fuel-powered automobiles by 2038. GM announced in October its plans to go all electric, joining Volvo, Jaguar Land Rover and Aston Martin. By 2040, a third of the automobiles on the planet—530 million—will get their power from an electric plug instead of a nozzle. But there are more immediate indications. In Consumer Reports’ 2016 Owner Satisfaction Survey, Tesla’s electric car finished at the top, with 91 percent of owners saying they’d buy a Tesla vehicle again. A recent federal report from the U.S. Department of Energy’s National Renewable Energy Laboratory addresses the question of how much plug-in electric vehicle (PEV) charging infrastructure our country needs. The report seeks to guide public and private stakeholders interested in shaping the future electric vehicle-charging network. Unlike internal combustion vehicles fueled by gas stations, PEV infrastructure also includes residential electric vehicle supply equipment. That’s because most people charge their cars at home. They also don’t really drive that far: 70 percent of daily driving for gas-powered vehicles is less than 40 miles; 95 percent is under 100 miles. An average vehicle only travels 100 miles or more on six days per year. The real issue for most drivers considering purchase of an electric vehicle is what happens when they travel outside their vehicle’s range? Long-distance travel has been a barrier to PEV adoption ever since the first electric car. But an extensive and convenient network of charging stations could make intercity travel reliable. The analysis found that approximately 400 corridor-charging stations (spaced 70 miles apart on average) would be required to provide convenient access to PEV drivers across the U.S. Interstate System. The next step for North Carolina is development of a statewide network of charging stations that benefits urban and rural travelers, including those who live in multi-family housing. We have the opportunity to accomplish this through wise investment of the $92 million fund North Carolina will receive under settlement of the Volkswagen emissions scandal. The amount was determined based on the 16,000 affected 2.0- and 3.0-liter diesel engine vehicles registered in the state. The Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) is accepting comment on how the state should spend the money through Dec. 31 at https://deq.nc.gov/about/divisions/air-quality. There are 10 categories under which the money may be spent. Up to 15 percent of the funds may be spent to buy and install charging stations. North Carolina should follow the example of California, which has made installing charging stations under the Volkswagen program in low income and disadvantaged communities disproportionately affected by air pollution a priority. Investing in charging stations will supplement the 2,500-plus non-proprietary electric vehicle chargers Volkswagen will install at more than 450 station sites along high-traffic corridors between U.S. metropolitan areas. Also, Volkswagen will install community chargers in 11 cities nationwide, including the Raleigh area. Governor Roy Cooper has directed the DEQ to develop a plan for spending the settlement; however, the General Assembly has said legislators must approve how the money is spent. Regardless of how the plan is developed, public hearings should be held for transparent and open debate on how we will shape the future of transportation and access to alternative fuels. Show up! Speak out!

North Carolina experienced a smooth election kickoff last week. Just kidding. That is no longer the North Carolina Way. Instead, filing for candidates for everything from dogcatcher to U.S. Senate was set to begin Monday morning, with state legislative and U.S. congressional candidates lining up to vie for seats in new maps drawn by the N.C. General Assembly following the 2020 Census. With caravans of congressional and state House and Senate candidates converging on election boards, a three-judge N.C. Appellate Court panel essentially told them to turn those caravans around. It halted filing for those races due to lawsuits saying the new districts were unconstitutionally gerrymandered. Later that day, the full 15-member court, to paraphrase “The Price Is Right’’ host Bob Barker, overruled that move and told candidates to “Come on Down!” And thus, the Herald reported in last week’s edition, which rolled off the press around noon on Wednesday. Well, Wednesday wasn’t over. Later in the day the N.C. Supreme Court ordered an end to filing for everyone, and moved the 2022 primary from March 8 to May 17. The court says the delay will give the state time to settle lawsuits regarding the new maps, and ordered the judges in those cases to make rulings by Jan. 11. Of course, there’s no telling if that will actually settle things, as the map issue seems destined to ping-pong around every court proponents and opponents can find. “Anything’s possible on Opening Day and in North Carolina redistricting,” said Chris Cooper, the Robert Lee Madison Distinguished Professor and Director of Western Carolina University’s Public Policy Institute. “We’ve been down this road before and we’ve seen the suite of outcomes — from the court throwing out maps and starting over, to the court saying the maps were just fine as they were. Sometimes the court splits the difference and says that the maps aren’t fair, but it’s not under their purview to decide whether they should be fair or not. Any of this is possible. There’s no doubt that the current maps are better for the Republicans than the Democrats, the question is whether the court will decide that they meet a legal standard of gerrymandering.” Cooper says the timeline for the election should come into focus, quickly, in January. “It seems like the court is trying to move quickly. The hearing will take place by January 11. We can safely assume that no matter the outcome, there will be an appeal, but I would expect that appeal to be filed and heard quickly. Another way to approach the question is to move backwards-mail balloting should start 50 days before the election, which would put it at March 28 (or April 1, if the State Board moved it to day 45, which they technically have the ability to do). Candidate filing needs to end at least 21 days before that, which would put it at around March 7. So, put all of that together, and it seems likely that we’ll have the ‘final’ maps by the end of February at the latest. But, lest we get too excited, ‘final’ just means ‘final’ for 2022. As to what we could expect in 2024, your guess is as good as mine.” This guessing game is one we’re playing in pretty much every election in North Carolina, and it does a huge disservice to voters, who after all are the people who matter the most in elections. Litigation over redistricting resulted in delays to all or some of state primaries in 2002, 2004 and 2016. New maps were ordered to be drawn in 2016 and 2019. This jerking around of the electoral calendar impacts even the folks who have the time to figure out their new district lines and field of candidates to choose from. Average folks who are busy with their jobs, their kids, their church and their lives can easily miss those details and other important information such as the deadline to file, etc. There’s a fix for this: independent, non-partisan commissions that split up maps fairly and let the voters choose the politicians, not the other way around. These commissions have been tried with success in a number of states. It’s worth a try. As is, the number of non-competitive races, featuring districts weighed heavily in favor of one party or another, have reached an appalling number in North Carolina. The result means many seats are barely even competed for; who wants to mount a challenge against an incumbent flush with cash sitting on a built-in 10-point lead? The result also is entrenched politicians who can go to bed at night confident they really don’t have to bother listening to their constituents. That’s not the way a representative system should work. And it has a corrosive effect on service to the people, which is the whole point of a government. We’re paying a price for years of this. And that price, as Bob Barker might say, is wrong. This article originally appeared in the Sylva Herald.

Broadband access is a critical resource for all Americans to participate in today’s technology-driven society. Access to educational information is vital. It is imperative for educators, students and parents to have reliable broadband or a creative approach to ensure students in rural areas have a level playing field with high speed broadband and access to the world. The United States has made progress in expanding high speed internet access to rural areas by adopting reforms by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). North Carolina has addressed some of the more significant issues relative to broadband. A positive for North Carolina is the fact that 93 percent of the state has broadband coverage. A challenge is to increase the percentage of households that have access to speeds greater than the low-end speed of 25 megabits per second (mbps) and 3 mbps upload. In some areas, there is a need for cable and telephone connections. North Carolina does rank 15th in the nation for connectivity, with over 16 Internet providers, according to the FCC. However, the FCC reports that more than 48,000 residents in 16 counties of Western North Carolina do not have access to high- speed internet service. At issue is who will build the infrastructure to accommodate rural communities lacking access. Local governments that cannot legally build their own systems are challenged with convincing private sector companies to invest in rural areas. In 2008, Wilson, North Carolina built its own high speed broadband network. But a federal appeals court reinstated a 2011 North Carolina law that blocks local governments from building their own broadband service in competition with telecommunications providers. Another factor to consider in expanding broadband to rural areas and cities is the resistance cities face from opponents who are fighting access. The situation that took place in Louisville, Kentucky is an example of a stifling strategy. The city of Louisville proposed $5.4 million to expand Louisville’s ultra-fast internet access. Dave Williams, president of the Taxpayers Alliance opposed this proposal. The Taxpayers Alliance is part of the Koch brothers’ political donor network. Williams said, “fundamentally, we don’t believe that taxpayers should be funding broadband or internet systems.” The digital impact on education is certainly a major issue in North Carolina. The North Carolina General Assembly passed Session Law 2013-12/House Bill 44. The bill is intended to transition public schools funding from textbooks to digital materials including textbooks and instructional resources for all learners by 2017. As we enter into the New Year, the question: Where does the implementation on House Bill 44 stand relative to switching from traditional textbooks to digital materials and instructional resources in schools located in rural North Carolina? Myra Best of digiLEARN, the Digital Learning Institute, a national non-profit established by former Gov. Beverly Perdue, says, “Teachers need support to make that transition and the digital resources and the quality digital content to meet the expectations for higher education. We have come a long way, we have the infrastructure and network for schools, now we have to get students ready to personalize this learning opportunity and close the digital achievement gap. A major accomplishment in North Carolina is that all public and private schools and universities are connected to the same network.” MCNC, a nonprofit organization, was part of the research network that was used to build a ring to connect all of the public schools. This bodes well for the state going forward. But Best added, “In June of 2018, every classroom will have unlimited access to Wi-Fi. Despite this, it does not solve the problem for kids who go home and do not have access to the internet.” Kevin Smith, Schools-Community Relations Coordinator for Transylvania County Schools, highlighted what is being done in his school system to address the problem for children lacking internet access. Educators and community leaders have made a conscious effort to ensure students without home internet service are not disadvantaged in their educational learning. The initiative in Transylvania County Schools makes a good attempt to close the digital gap for students. Even without internet access at home, they can open their documents offline using school-provided Chromebook computers. Students can create, view and edit files, with changes synced back to their online profile at school. This is an innovative concept to address the rural gap for internet access. This concept provides a degree of equity and fairness to children by putting devices in their hands. Smith says the effort requires constant oversight and coordination, and he gives great credit to the Golden Leaf Foundation for their investment in this initiative. Another partnership has been implemented by Sprint and their public service act of providing 10,000 North Carolina high school students with wireless devices. Buncombe County Schools is partnering with Sprint to ensure all of their high school students have Internet connectivity by utilizing a “Homework Hotspot” from their school. The Homework Hotspot enables school-issued devices to connect to the Sprint Network. Both of these initiatives are stopgap measures and do not alleviate the need for real time internet access to the homes of students. North Carolina businesses would not accept the lack of real time capability for their operations, nor would lack of real time communication benefit first responders, who need the capability to contact with homes and businesses in rural areas. The network connection for public and private schools and universities demonstrate what can be done with public-private partnership. The stop gap innovations noted above are to be commended for the short time frame, but the public and private sector must continue to work together to provide real time internet communication capabilities for all areas of North Carolina and the nation. Jane Smith Patterson, Partner, Broadband Catalysts contributed to this commentary.

It’s Sunshine Week, the annual event held to “promote open government and push back against excessive official secrecy.” Sunshine Week is a nationwide initiative spearheaded by the American Society of News Editors. While the seven-day campaign began in 2005, its roots go back to 2002 when journalists in Florida were fighting attempts to enact massive exemptions to that state’s public record laws. Why is Sunshine Week important? Simply put, citizens of this country have a right to know how decisions are reached by the officials representing them, all the way from Pennsylvania Avenue down to Main Street. In many cases that knowledge keys on access to records of deliberations and meetings. It’s about accountability. If the sheer moral aspect of expecting such accountability isn’t enough, we’ll appeal to baser instincts: The decisions those leaders make affect your life. And you’re paying the salaries of those leaders through your taxes. They’re your servants, not the other way around. As such, you have a right to know what they’re up to. This isn’t a conservative issue, or liberal, or libertarian. It’s everyone’s issue. If we know what leaders are up to, they’re far less likely to be up to no good. Judge Louis Brandeis framed the issue well when he said, “Publicity is justly commended as a remedy for social and industrial diseases. Sunlight is said to be the best of disinfectants; electric light the most efficient policeman.” The sunlight/policeman analogy hits home in these parts in that it sums up the controversy surrounding the biggest story of the year thus far: the Feb. 28 release of a video that showed Asheville Police Department Officer Chris Hickman beating and tasering an Asheville man following an escalation in the wake of a man who was stopped for alleged jaywalking. The affair highlights a serious flaw in North Carolina law, which does not regard police bodycam video as a public record. If you’re someone who appears on such footage you can request access to look at it, but to get the footage released you’ll need a court order. That serves neither the public nor law enforcement well, and the Asheville incident is a textbook case of that. The incident involving Hickman occurred on Aug. 25, 2017. The bodycam video was reviewed by Asheville’s police chief the following day; the officer’s badge and sidearm were taken from him. An internal investigation occurred, and the officer resigned shortly before the chief was ready to fire him. That was in January, more than 130 days after the incident occurred. The public had no idea. In fact, it would still have no idea if someone hadn’t broken the law and leaked the video to the Asheville Citizen-Times, which broke the story on Feb. 28. The value of bodycam video is that it can bring rogue officers to justice, but also that it can exonerate officers from accusations at the hands of rogue citizens. That is, if it’s public record. This case is at best a public relations disaster for the APD. With a lack of sunshine, rumors are flying wild in the public regarding what happened regarding the investigation, and with a lack of sunshine questions are flying regarding whether the public would’ve heard about this case at all were it not for the leak. The FBI has taken an interest in the matter. The APD may be being treated unfairly in the court of public opinion; we just don’t know. We do know it feels like a cover-up occurred in many corners of the community. In the end, it’s safe to say the whole affair could have been prevented if North Carolina had written its law in a more sensible fashion. Certainly, bodycam footage shouldn’t be released in an indiscriminate manner. But this case vividly illustrates that it needs to be public record. Otherwise, what’s the point in having it at all?

The proposed amendment that would change the rules for who appoints North Carolina judges when vacancies occur between elections started as a 101-word sentence with two semicolons. The Flesch Reading Ease formula gave it a score of -52.3 and termed it impossible to comprehend. Faced with the herculean task of trying to decipher it, it’s easy to see why voters would toss a coin or just give up. That’s one way citizens can be robbed of any real say in how their government operates. Incomprehensible amendments are only one difficulty for voters. It’s been a year of lawsuits and chaos surrounding every aspect of voting as the Republican-controlled General Assembly spent much of its time defending gerrymandered districts, trying to strip power from the executive and judicial branches and trying to make voting more challenging. The most recent installment in this ongoing outrage occurred in late August when three federal judges, for the second time, ruled Congressional maps drawn by state lawmakers an unconstitutional partisan gerrymander that favors Republicans. But even the League of Women Voters and Common Cause, groups that sued to have the maps overturned, agree it’s too late to redraw them before the November election. That decision came right after a federal court ruled the wording of two constitutional amendments, including the one mentioned above, was so misleading that they could not appear on the ballot. However, the court allowed GOP lawmakers to rewrite the amendments. In a hastily called special session the General Assembly scaled back one and barely changed other. They did this just days before the deadline for printing absentee ballots. The two were among six constitutional amendments GOP lawmakers placed on the ballot in June during the last week of the 2018 session with virtually no debate or public input. Two, including the judicial vacancies one, are blatant power grabs that would undermine the executive and judiciary. Two fix problems that don’t exist. Two should be addressed by legislation after all their implications are thoroughly debated. None should be amendments to the state’s constitution. All five of the state’s living governors, two Republicans and three Democrats, jointly condemned the two amendments that would have stripped from governors and given to the legislature the power to appoint members to hundreds of boards and commissions and to appoint judges and justices to vacant seats. There are outliers, but most citizens want a government that is efficient, free of corruption and supportive of business. One that stays out of people’s private lives so long as they do not harm others. And one that keeps tax rates as low as is compatible with the functions government must perform, such as providing public education, ensuring public safety, building a safe and adequate infrastructure, protecting the environment that sustains us and providing a safety net for those who cannot care for themselves. To some, it may seem that business friendly government and some of those objectives are mutually exclusive, but quite the opposite is true. An educated workforce, a dependable infrastructure, a clean environment and a culture of compassion are all objectives that support a healthy and enviable marketplace. But keeping government efficient and business friendly while meeting those objectives requires an ongoing balancing act, one that demands a collaborative approach with many competing interests at the table. Imperfect as it is, the fact that ours is the richest and most successful nation in the world is testament to its success in achieving that balance. One person, one vote. A fair playing field where all interests have a chance to be heard. An attempt to find compromise that takes them all into account. These principles were built into our system of checks and balances. But these principles are at risk in North Carolina. The Republican-controlled legislature has tried everything its members could collectively think of in recent years to take power from voters and from the judicial and executive branches and gather it to themselves. The confusion that has generated as the midterm election approaches is a powerful incentive for voters to throw up their hands and stay home on Election Day. But if voters tolerate such behavior, we risk putting far too much power in the hands of far too few and losing the principles and the balance that supports our freedom and economic strength. There are resources to help us learn about candidates and ballot initiatives before the election. One is ballotpedia.org, a non-profit, non-partisan encyclopedia of American politics and elections. Another is the state Board of elections website ncsbe.gov. This may be the most important state election in a generation. It’s a critical time for voters to claim their power.

The effects of the opioid crisis on North Carolina are far-ranging. According to CDC estimates, the cost of unintentional opioid-related overdose deaths in the state totaled $1.3 billion in 2015. But those hurt most by the crisis are inevitably those on the front lines: the opioid users themselves, their children, and the caregivers who pick up the pieces. According to a new report by North Carolina Child, addiction has thrown thousands of children into foster care. Some 16,556 North Carolina children lived in foster care last year. For 39 percent of foster care cases in 2016–2017, parental substance misuse was a contributing factor, up 50 percent since 2007–2008. North Carolina Child cites a lack of affordable health care for parents as a major contributing factor. According to the report, most North Carolinians with a mental health diagnosis or substance abuse disorder in 2014 fell into a “coverage gap,” meaning they would gain access to health insurance only if the state expanded income eligibility for Medicaid. By the parents not getting treatment, the children are at increased risk of becoming addicts themselves. North Carolina moved to the national forefront of the opioid crisis after a 2016 study from the health care information company Castlight found that 22 out of the top 25 cities for opioid abuse were in the South, with four in North Carolina: Wilmington in the number one spot (11.6 percent opioid abuse rate); Hickory fifth at 9.9 percent; Jacksonville 12th at 8.2; and Fayetteville 18th at 7.9. In its study of prescription opioid drug use in the workforce, the study found that in Wilmington, more than half, or 53.8 percent, of all opioid prescriptions in the city were abused. That year, according to the state Department of Health and Human Services, nearly four North Carolinians died each day from an unintentional opioid overdose. The North Carolina Action Plan, developed last year with input from the state’s Opioid and Prescription Drug Abuse Advisory Committee, laid out a strategic approach for combating the opioid crisis. The plan called for creating a coordinated infrastructure, reducing oversupply of prescription opioids, reducing diversion of prescription drugs and flow of illicit drugs, increasing community awareness and prevention, making naloxone (Narcan) widely available, linking overdose survivors to care, expanding treatment and recovery, measuring the impact and revising strategies based on results. A dashboard of metrics tracked by the state provides details on progress toward goals established last year. Two areas show promising results: Reducing the oversupply of prescription opioids. This is essential. According to Politifact, quoting Steve Marshall, an epidemiologist and director of UNC-Chapel Hill’s Injury Prevention Research Center, “When we talk to people who are injecting heroin, they all got there through prescription opioids. It’s not some of them. It’s all of them.” In the last quarter of 2017, under 121 million opioid pills were dispensed in North Carolina, down from over 141 million dispensed in the same quarter of 2016. Also, in the fourth quarter of 2017 20.3 percent of patient prescription days had an overlapping benzodiazepine and opioid prescription, compared to 25.1 percent in the last quarter of 2016. Increasing access to treatment and recovery. This metric can be an indication of increased access to treatment, since buprenorphine is administered in medication-assisted treatment to help treat opioid addiction. Over 154,000 prescriptions for buprenorphine were dispensed in North Carolina during the last quarter of 2017, up from 128,000 in the last quarter of 2016. Gov. Roy Cooper agrees that access to affordable health insurance is a vital component to combating the crisis. In a letter to Congress in January, he wrote “One in five adults with an opioid addiction is uninsured, and in our state, like others, there is a correlation between areas with a large uninsured population and rates of addiction. Making health care more accessible and more affordable helps people struggling with substance use disorders and their families as well as those at-risk of developing addictions. At least 150,000 North Carolinians could benefit if Medicaid were expanded to cover people with substance use disorder.” By looking at what has worked elsewhere, North Carolina can not only save lives, but save families. The North Carolina Child report states that millions of Americans have found help for their opioid addictions through health care coverage provided under Medicaid expansion in other states. North Carolina’s failure to provide this for our state means that more families will be torn apart by addiction, with children paying the ultimate price. ————————— The Carolina Commentary team would like your feedback on our first year; what we did well, what we can do better, and what issues may have fallen through the cracks. Go to survey here and help shape the face of Carolina Commentary in the coming year.

Sample ballots are now available for viewing in North Carolina, and it would pay to take a moment and peruse your choices before stepping into the voting booth. That’s because ballots will look a little different this year due to actions taken in Raleigh. Wrinkles in the ballot have a long history in North Carolina. For example, there was a time when you could simply choose to vote a straight party ticket instead of voting in individual races. That option has gone the way of the dodo. Even this wrinkle had its own wrinkle. Through the 2012 elections you could cast a straight-party vote, but that didn’t include casting a vote for U.S. president and vice-president. That plan was hatched by state Democrats to boost local candidates as the GOP began to gain national popularity in the 1960s. However, the plan has a serious flaw; a significant number of voters cast straight-party votes but failed to mark a choice for president. In 2000 the state recorded a 3.15 percent undervote – i.e., 92,000 Tar Heels went to the polls but failed to cast a vote for president. In 2004, that number was 75,000. Straight-party voting was allowed through the 2012 election. The GOP-dominated legislature passed a bill in 2013 eliminating the option, a measure that went into effect in 2014. When it came to electoral engineering, they didn’t stop there. The new twist this year goes a little like this: Roy Cooper, a Democrat, had the temerity to be elected governor in 2016. Under law at the time, candidates in the governor’s party would be listed first on the 2018 ballot. That clearly wouldn’t do, so the legislature, under HB 496, decided candidate names would appear in random order. In February, the State Board of Elections and Ethics Enforcement held a random drawing determining the alphabetical order of candidates in the May primary. The letter “F” was drawn, meaning a candidate with a last name starting with F would appear in the first ballot position, cycling through the alphabet and ending with “E.” In previous elections, candidates in the governor’s party were listed first. This year the order will be under the alphabetical drawing regardless of party. So, does ballot order matter? The short answer is yes. The long answer was provided in an article by University of Virginia Center for Politics director Larry Sabato. In poring through eight research essays on voting order, it was found that for voters who walked into their polling place without well-defined determinations voted as much as 5 percent more in favor of the first name listed. Of course, there are plenty of caveats. Well-known candidates, such as those running for president, governor or U.S. Senator, tended to produce fewer additional first-name-listed votes. Lesser-known candidates in the middle and toward the bottom of the ballot gained more of an advantage by being listed first. Partisan races have a lower first-name bias than non-partisan races. Primaries have a larger bias than general elections. In races with multiple candidates, those listed first or last tend to fare better than the crowd in the middle. First-place bias will likely tilt the vote for the six constitutional amendments appeared on North Carolina’s ballot. “For’’ is the first option, and undoubtedly many people will choose it despite some of the … creative wording that appears, such as in the following measure: “Constitutional amendment to change the process for filling judicial vacancies that occur between judicial elections from a process in which the Governor has sole appointment power to a process in which the people of the State nominate individuals to fill vacancies by way of a commission comprised of appointees made by the judicial, executive, and legislative branches charged with making recommendations to the legislature as to which nominees are deemed qualified; then the legislature will recommend at least two nominees to the Governor via legislative action not subject to gubernatorial veto; and the Governor will appoint judges from among these nominees.” That’s about as clear as mud. It’s easy to see voters puzzling over it, and then simply punching “For’’ and moving on to the next amendment. It’s our responsibility to vote, and our responsibility to know what/who we’re voting for. Take a few minutes to check out your ballot. Go to www.nc.gov/voter-lookup-sample-ballot to see the political landscape you’ll be facing come early voting or Election Day.

More than three weeks after Hurricane Florence made landfall on the North Carolina coast, only a light breeze kept the smell of mold from being overwhelming along the streets in Fairfield Harbor. The community near New Bern no longer had a functioning gate, which probably makes it easier for cleanup crews trying to dry out the lovely homes surrounding the golf course. They have disgorged their first-floor furnishings along with wallboard, insulation, appliances and wiring onto lawns, where it sat in careless heaps, souring. Some homeowners are living on the second floor of their homes. One or two appear to be living in recreational vehicles parked in their driveways. A bad situation got worse when local officials asked people to cover debris piles with tarps to keep them from being scattered after warnings that Hurricane Michael could cause tropical storm force winds in New Bern. Hurricane Michael packed winds of 155 miles per hour when it hit the Florida Panhandle last week. How long will it be before life gets back to normal for those who live here? A long time by the look of things. And at what cost, especially for those with children and the elderly? Or to counties and municipalities who must haul all that debris away and dump it into landfills at taxpayers’ expense? Or to those without flood insurance? A Washington Post analysis comparing the number of policies in National Flood Insurance Program with the number of housing units in counties hit by the storm found that in Craven County, home to New Bern, only 9.9 percent of homes are covered by flood insurance. Home insurance doesn’t usually cover flooding, something many people don’t realize until their home floods and they try to make a claim. Most flood insurance is purchased through the National Flood Insurance Program administered by the Federal Emergency Management Agency. In Wilmington, located in New Hanover County and also the scene of severe flooding, 14.2 percent of homes have flood insurance, according to The Post analysis. Reporting by the Houston Chronicle following Hurricane Harvey in 2017, that while the National Flood Insurance Program was designed to insure properties vulnerable to flooding, only half of such properties carry flood insurance as required by law. The program, created by Congress in 1968, was intended to reduce the costs of disaster relief, but those costs have exploded, the Chronicle found, and while it was supposed to be self-supporting, premiums don’t come close to covering the expenses, requiring repeated bailouts by taxpayers. The Chronicle reported that numerous attempts to reform the program have been thwarted by real estate developers and builders bent on developing coastal property and some coastal leaders who covet the tax revenue that development brings. The failure of this legislation isn’t just in its cost to taxpayers, it’s in the misery it causes homeowners enticed to buy in flood-prone areas by low cost flood insurance, which rarely covers all the costs associated with the damage. To make matters worse, even those who would like to move often find themselves trapped because the value of their homes, once flooded, plummets. Sadly, the debris-lined streets of Fairfield Harbor create a scene observed far too often these days. Extreme flooding from Hurricane Matthew in October 2017 killed 28 people and damaged or destroyed more than 90,000 homes in North Carolina at a cost of $4.8 billion. But Matthew paled by comparison to Sandy, Harvey, Irma, Maria and other storms that have wreaked monumental damage on U.S. soil during past few years. And then there’s Michael, which came ashore at Mexico Beach, Fla., last week as the strongest storm to make landfall in the continental US since Hurricane Andrew in 1992. Two converging factors appear to be escalating this devastation. Scientists believe rising ocean temperatures may be contributing to more powerful hurricanes with more rainfall and higher storm surge, which is compounded by rising sea level. That, along with denser development in low lying coastal areas, creates a recipe for calamity. A report issued on October 8, 2018, by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, a group of scientists convened by the United Nations to guide world leaders, warned that if greenhouse gas emissions continue at the current rate, the atmosphere will warm up by as much as 2.7 degrees Fahrenheit (1.5 degrees Celsius) above preindustrial levels by 2040. Among the many results will be rising sea level and more extreme weather. The scientists conclude that only by dramatically reducing greenhouse gas emissions over the next 12 years can the direst consequences be avoided and they concede that’s politically unlikely. The failure of flood insurance reform is only one example of unworkable policies that short-sighted lawmakers indebted to special interests seem unable to address. At a time when we need visionary, principled leaders to deal with the challenges that confront us in North Carolina and the nation, the North Carolina General Assembly and Congress seem trapped in old models of economic prosperity and development that are not sustainable. And they are enslaved to special interests by campaign finance laws that favor big money over constituents’ interests. As a state and nation, we are consumed in a partisan fray we can ill afford. Our best hope is to use every means available to tell lawmakers and candidates for office that we expect them to stop demonizing and start reaching across the aisle, to stop putting party and special interests ahead of the state and country. And we need to vote against those who fail to do so, whatever their party. Additional reading: https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-texas/houston/article/Build-flood-rebuild-flood-insurance-s-12413056.php https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2018/09/17/only-percent-have-flood-insurance-hard-hit-carolina-coast/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.e52b43b84d53 https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/07/climate/ipcc-climate-report-2040.html