Civitas Capitol Connection

Legislators debate the merits of the voter ID bill. Proponents say it will bring needed integrity to elections. Opponents worry about voter

disenfranchisement. Photo: Jana Benscoter

Outer Banks blogger Lisa Marley is being interviewed by Mary Helen Goodloe-Murphy of the Coastland Times during an Outer Banks Tea Party rally. Marley is a town crier, Tea Party leader and precinct chair. Photo: Frank Warnecki

Civitas

BY SUSAN MYRICK

BY BOB LUEBKE

100 S

outh

Har

ringt

on St

reet

Ralei

gh, N

.C. 27

603-

1814

NO

N-P

ROFI

T O

RG.

US

POST

AGE

PAID

Perm

it #1

44

Reid

svill

e, N

C

T he road has been rocky, but the Republican ma-jority has voted Voter Photo ID legisla-

tion (House Bill 351, “Restore Confi-dence in Government”) out of House Committee on Elections. The bill is now headed to House Committee on Appropriations before moving to the full House for a vote in the coming weeks.Republicans on the Elections Committee veered off course when

Legislation Requires Photo ID to Vote

NCAE Executive Compensation Soars During Recession

Salary and compensation for the top four North Carolina Association of Educators (NCAE) executives in-creased on average 24 percent be-tween 2006 and 2009. Over the same time period, the average teacher sal-ary and compensation in North Car-olina increased 12 percent.

Top paid NCAE executives’ sala-ry including compensation are listed below. For more on NCAE compen-sation and political contributions, go to:http://www.nccivitas.org/2011/ncae-looking-out-for-children-members-or-itself/Name 2009 Salary

+ Comp= Total

Scott AndersonExec. Director

$135,000+ $94,120= $229,120

Kelvin SpragleyAssoc. Exec. Director

$134,547+ $55,813= $190,360

Jacqueline VaughanComm. Director

$127,860+ $56,108= $183,788

CAPITOL CONNECTION

In This Issue1

Legislation Requires Photo ID to VoteNCAE Executive Compensation

Citizen of the Month

2Veto-proof House Budget

From The Editor

3Local Leaders Make Call on Gun Laws

Accuracy Lacking in New Jobs Numbers

4Smart Start Could Face Budget Knife

Lawmakers Try to Fix State Health Plan

5Tobacco Settlement Funds Shuffling

Drilling Would Create JobsUnborn Victims Recognized

6NCAE Rally

Annexation Reform Nears Deal

7Unemployment Maps

8Washington County Sheriff Run-off Election

9Global TransPark a Money Pit

10-11Contact Your Legislator

12Scandal

May 2011 • Vol. 3, no. 4 www.nccivitas.org

CitizenContinued on Pg. 3

NCAE COMPContinued on Pg. 6

Citizen of the Month: Lisa MarleyOuter Banks Blogger and VolunteerBY JANA BENSCOTER

One thing Lisa Marley definitely does not have is time. In addition to her role as town crier, Tea Party leader and precinct chair, in her own words, she said she is also a wife, a care-taker of “not a few cats” and a full-time em-ployee in a job that is “just plain fun.”

“Everything else is a challenge that can be overcome,” Marley said.

Lured into the role of activist when President Barack Obama introduced in 2009 a federal law mandating that every American be covered by health insurance, which has become known as Obamacare, Marley and a group of other activists went to work on orga-nizing a local Dare County Tea Party rally. The rally attracted 300 people to

Voter IDContinued on Pg. 9

they attempted to re-write House Bill 351 to appease House Democrats and avoid a possible gubernatorial veto.

Their first bill substitute elimi-nated the requirement for

a photo ID to access a ballot and would have allowed a voter to use their voter registration card, utility bill or bank statement among other documents to cast a ballot. Almost immediately after

it. Acknowledging that she felt con-servative “voices had been silenced for far too long and that it was time to do something,” she decided to speak up.

“There are only two buses that go to Washington DC, the Democrat bus and the Republican bus,” Marley said. “If you’re not on one of those buses, you’re not going to be able to affect public policy.”

Attending Civitas Institute watch-dog training in November 2009 taught by Trent Seibert of Houston-based Texas Watchdog, Marley said she was inspired to set up a blog im-mediately while participating in the class. Her blog, www.truthordarenc.com, an investigative journalism blog focused on Dare County politics, has helped to unfold corrupt actions made by state leaders. Just as importantly, it

Would you favor or oppose a law that requires voters to show government-issued photo identification, such as a driver’s license or passport, before being allowed cast a vote in an election?

Civitas Poll December 2010

Strongly Favor 72%Somewhat Favor 12%Somewhat Oppose 4%Strongly Oppose 12%

the compromise bill was announced, liberal special interest groups made it clear that they would oppose any bill that would require an ID to cast a bal-lot – photo or no photo.

Republicans quickly went back to the drawing board and produced an-other substitute that was virtually the same as HB 351, with a few adjust-ments.

House bill 351, is not a perfect Voter Photo ID bill - but it is a be-ginning. It is the beginning of much needed election reform in a state that only requires a voter to state their name and address in order to receive a ballot. North Carolina, opting for the honor system instead of ballot security in the polling place, has some of the most relaxed election laws in the na-

2 May 2011 nccivitas.org

CAPITOL CONNECTIONCivitas

PUBLISHER

Francis X. De [email protected]

MANAGING EDITOR

Jana [email protected]

Editorial & Advertising

100 S. Harrington Street

Raleigh, NC 27603

919-834-2099 (phone)

919-834-2350 (fax)

www.nccivitas.org

All non-advertising content published

in Civitas Capitol Connection may be

republished as long as appropriate

credit is given and it is published in its

entirety.

Copyright 2011


NAME

ADDRESS

CIT Y

STATE Z IP

PHONES

EMAIL

Please mail to:100 South Harrington Street, Raleigh, NC 27603

http://www.nccivitas.org/signup | 919-747-8052

Not a subscriber? Get a

FREE SUBSCRIPTION Not sure if you are a subscriber? Verify by

checking the address label. If the word“subscriber” is not included, you need to

subscribe to insure you continue toreceive your very own issue of


BY JANA BENSCOTERF R O M T H E E D I T O R

Cuts in Education: An Overplayed Politically Divisive Tool

“Cuts in education” is a phrase that often draws a gasp without knowing the full story. The story often told is one that imposes fear and a free-for-all way of thinking that there won’t be enough mon-ey to adequately educate children in each school system across the state. The phrase, which implies there will be cuts that di-rectly affect the classroom, is a politically divisive tool that is overplayed during bud-get negotiations.

Let’s remove the emotion that swells from the phrase and ask: how has spend-ing more money worked in favor of educating North Carolina kindergarten through grade twelve students?

The answer is not very well. Look-ing at test scores alone, a Civitas Institute review of spending in education matched up with annual state exams shows that money has not solved an academic algo-rithm.

In a report published less than a year ago and using North Carolina Depart-ment of Public Instruction Data, Educa-tion Policy Analyst Bob Luebke reported that spending has not been the silver bul-let. “Since 2000, state support per pu-pil has increased 35 percent. However, over the same period the percentage of schools making expected growth under the state’s ABC Testing Program has only averaged 36 percent per year. In no year has the percentage of schools making ex-pected growth exceeded 48 percent of all

BY ANDREW HENSON

Over the course of rectifying the $2.4 billion budget shortfall, the North Caro-lina House was forced to explore a wide variety of means to cut back, consolidate, and eliminate many bureaucratic func-tions – culminating in the recently passed fiscal year 2011-13 biennium budget. This budget, which for fiscal year 2011-12 totals $19.3 billion – plummeting state spending $1.5 billion lower than the previous fiscal year – exceeds even Governor Perdue’s rec-ommended cuts by $600 million.

The Republican-written House bud-get carried a number of Democratic votes, passing the budget on a 72-47 vote and giving the House a veto-proof majority. The surprising Democratic support in the House expedited the budget writing pro-cess – and may quicken the pace of the N.C. Senate, which is controlled by a veto-proof majority of Republicans. The Senate majority may try to tailor their goals to-wards the House’s plan in order to preserve the veto-proof support of the budget plan.

Representing more than half of state government expenditures, the House’s ed-ucation budget saw a number of prioritized cuts and maneuvers to reach the state’s budget balancing needs. In its most con-troversial move, the House budget nearly halves funding for Teacher Assistants, cut-ting funds for 2nd and 3rd grade assistants. The House, however, took a firm stand on fully funding teachers, appropriating an extra $55.8 million to fully support the ex-pected enrollment growth for the coming year. This move means that if additional teachers are needed to accommodate a growing student population, the money will be available.

Early education programs were also the subject of substantial changes, as the House budget consolidates More at Four – North Carolina’s pre-kindergarten pro-gram tailored to at-risk four year-olds pre-viously administered by the Department of Public Instruction (DPI) – under the De-partment of Health and Human Services (DHHS). The overall enrollment for More at Four – soon to be named the pre-kinder-garten program – will drop from 31,000 to 29,000 and participants will submit to a 10 percent co-pay to enroll. The consolidation cuts an overall amount of $16 million, or 20 percent from the total budget.

House Budget Trims, Cuts, ConsolidatesPasses with a Veto-Proof Majority

Adjustments to Medicaid pro-vider rates together exceeded $100 mil-lion budget savings. The House budget stipulates a moratorium on inflationary increases on reimbursement rates paid to healthcare providers from Medicaid, which totaled $62.8 million. Addition-ally, the House budget reduces the overall reimbursement rate for Medicaid by 2 percent, with exceptions made for physi-cian and hospital in-patient services. Fur-ther provisions include directing DHHS to revise its pharmacy dispensing fees to encourage a greater number of generic medicine prescriptions – a cost-saving maneuver that would yield $15 million.

House leadership seems poised to make good on a promise of no new taxes and to let a temporary sales tax expire – in contrast to Perdue’s insistence on a sales tax increase. Perdue’s increase of ¾ of a cent would cost taxpayers an estimated $826 million. The House’s promise of no new taxes, however, has put the chamber in a strenuous position of making deeper cuts in state services. While Governor Perdue’s recommended budget sheds around 10,000 state jobs, N.C. House’s budget eliminates around 18,500 posi-tions. Many of those positions, however, are currently vacant or will be lost due to employees retiring or otherwise leaving their jobs. Despite many tough decisions made, House Republicans emerged opti-mistic about their performance through-out.

“This was not an easy budget. We knew it would be difficult,” Rep. Barn-hardt (R – Cabarrus) told the Raleigh News & Observer, “I think what we’ve got is a good product overall.” w

schools.” Just because public education has

become accustomed to receiving ever-increasing levels of taxpayer funding, does that mean public schools in North Carolina must continue to function in a way that we can all see is not working? If we want to improve education, and be fiscally responsible, lawmakers and edu-cators should think creatively.

One such example of creative think-ing is the use of voucher schools and their option of instructional methods. A recent Wall Street Journal article reported that while the White House came out against vouchers, there was much evi-dence to support their effectiveness.

“A recent study of Milwaukee’s older and larger voucher program found that 94 percent of students who stayed in the program throughout high school gradu-ated, versus just 75 percent of students in Milwaukee’s traditional public schools” according to the Wall Street Journal. Greg Forster of the Foundation for Edu-cational Choice, in a paper released in March, wrote that “every empirical study ever conducted in Milwaukee, Florida, Ohio, Texas, Maine and Vermont finds that voucher programs in those places improved public schools.”

The article also reports, “Such results might influence the thinking of an ob-jective observer primarily interested in doing right by the nation’s poor children. But they are unlikely to sway a politician focused on getting re-elected with the help of teachers unions.”

Outside of vouchers, 22 states are currently operating on a four-day week. Data collected by the National Confer-ence of State Legislatures and the Edu-cation Commission of the States reveals, “With strapped state budgets and allur-

ing promises of significant reductions in overhead and transportation costs, the four-day school week has been an increasingly attractive option for legisla-tors seeking to cut education costs. For small, remote school districts, institut-ing a four-day school week may provide a savings by reducing transportation, heating, and staff costs. Supporters of the shortened week also boast of im-proved morale and increased attendance (by both students and teachers), open Fridays for sporting events and doctor appointments, and more time to spend with loved ones. Opponents of the four-day school week cite problems with long, exhausting class days and find-ing day care for children whose parents work outside the home. Additionally, educational experts worry longer week-ends could lead to a regression in learned concepts while also making it more dif-ficult to offer elective classes. However, the jury is still out on many of these is-sues, as there is a lack of comprehensive studies.”

Two main points addressed in a Center for American Progress report highlight, “Many school districts could boost student achievement without increasing spending if they used their money more productively.” And, “Low productivity costs the nation’s school sys-tem as much as $175 billion a year.”

During such tough economic times we don’t need more irresponsible spend-ing. Rather, we need to find strategic reductions that allow us to educate our children more economically or more efficiently. Creative measures are an important component for ensuring the academic success of all children. After all, shouldn’t that be the goal of public education? w

3May 2011nccivitas.org


Local Leaders to Make Call on Proposed New Gun LawsBY KATIE TROUT

Raleigh City Council in March voted unanimously to approve a res-olution that opposes House Bill 111, “Handgun Permit Valid in Parks & Restaurants.” They are the first local municipality to stand on a provision that law enforcement hopes remains in the bill.

Filed by four Republican law-makers, the bill would allow con-cealed carry handgun (CCH) permit owners into both restaurants where alcohol is served and state parks. Sponsored by Reps. Jeff Barnhart (R-Cabarrus), Kelly Hastings (R-

Gaston), Mark Hilton (R-Catawba), and Fred Steen (R-Rowan), this bill would overturn current state law, which bans any concealed carry handgun owner from consuming al-cohol. Forty-two other states allow CCH permit owners in restaurants that serve alcohol.

“Already, 40 other states allow concealed carry permit holders to carry in restaurants that serve alco-hol with no problems. There is no reason to believe those that carry in North Carolina restaurants will be less responsible than the 40 other states that allow them,” Hilton said.

“There is nothing in state statute that prevents those [concealed carry holders] from carrying in state parks; this just says that it is permitted by law. In local parks, why should the criminals be the only ones that are carrying guns? Why should we not allow law abiding citizens to protect themselves from rape, robbery and murders?”

According to AmmoLand.com, among several items, “individuals covered by HB 111 have been veri-fied by their sheriff as law-abiding citizens who have proven they are trained in the law and proficient with their weapons; (handgun per-mit owners) have passed criminal background checks and had their fingerprints cleared by the FBI (Fed-eral Bureau of Investigation); the sheriff has verified they are not al-coholics or substance abusers, and in the case of veterans, were honorably discharged; and this class of people – who number approximately 2% of North Carolinians – have proven, over the past 16 years, to be respon-sible, prudent, safe, and overwhelm-ing law-abiding.”

Reported by WRAL.com, “Ra-leigh City leaders said they wanted to be on the record with their oppo-sition to the bill, which would take effect in December if it becomes law.” The bill passed in the House with a 74 to 42 vote, primarily along party lines with nine Democrats vot-

ing with Republicans.The President of the North Car-

olina Association of Chiefs of Police Patricia Norris told The Daily South-erner, “I think that was the biggest issue, that municipalities have a say-so in how they could run business in their cities.” As long as that provi-sion stays in the legislation, police chiefs will salute and enforce the law, she said.

Rep. Hilton is also a sponsor for House Bill 650, “Amend Various Gun Laws.” The changes include:

- Lowers penalty for knowing-ly possessing or carrying a weapon on educational property from a Class 1 felony to Class 1 misdemeanor

- Allows CCH owners to keep unloaded guns locked in their vehi-cles on educational property

- Permits CCH owners to car-ry at parades and demonstrations

- Removes the financial insti-tution carry restriction

- Establishes that all valid handgun permits from other states are valid in North Carolina

With this broad set of rule chang-es, the Legislature hopes to create a uniform system of rules for carrying a concealed handgun in North Caro-lina. And while public sentiment ap-pears mixed on what sweeping new gun legislation should entail, these bills have certainly brought new attention to Second Amendment rights in our state. w

Believers in the 2nd Amendment gathered in Greensboro National Park for the Armed Open Carry “Restore the Constitution Rally.” The event was held in August 2010. Photo: Randy Dye

has become a community forum for providing information not found in mainstream media.

“We’ve seen two of Marc Bas-night and Gov. Beverly Perdue’s deep-pocket donors brought up on criminal charges related to il-legal campaign donations,” Marley said. “One donor, Fred Hobbs, was fined by the State Board of Elections $150,000, the largest fine ever levied by that body.”

Basnight is the former state Sen-ate President Pro Tempore, who represented a Dare County-based district, and held the leadership po-sition for 18 years before Republi-cans swept the state in the November 2010 elections. While he retained his seat, Basnight resigned the day before the 2011 long session began.

Marley’s success with her blog made matters easier for her when she founded the Outer Banks Tea Party. She is heavily involved with organiz-ing the OBX Tea Party and also writes for www.obxteapartynews.com. And if that wasn’t enough involvement,

she is also a precinct chair with the Dare County Republican Party.

“We are finding that as the local GOP is asserting itself and showcas-ing its victories, future conservative leaders are starting to come out of the closet,” Marley said. “They know it’s ok to talk about their values, that they are not alone and that, if they run for office, they will have a strong machine to help get them elected.”

Where does she get this energy? Marley said she derives her inspira-tion from the Revolutionary War military and its humbled begin-nings. When she thinks of struggle, she thinks of the extreme challenges, hardships and sacrifices the soldiers endured to forge ahead in establish-ing the United States of America.

“Our founders gave up so much to give us this country; the most prosperous, freest country ever to exist on the face of the Earth,” Mar-ley said. “The founders pledged and gave their lives, their fortunes and their sacred honor.”

Read both www.truthordarenc.com and www.obxteapartynews.com to keep up with May Civitas Citizen of the Month Lisa Marley. w

CitizenCONTINUED FROM PG 1

Accuracy Lacking in “New” Jobs NumbersBY MATT WILLOUGHBY

There was a lot of talk about lost jobs at dueling press conferences by Gov. Beverly Perdue and Republican Senate President Pro Tem Phil Berger recently. Berger said over 100,000 jobs had been lost since Perdue took office. Perdue didn’t dispute that but said she has worked to create more jobs and claimed many successes.

The actual numbers por-tray a scenario even worse than what Berger men-tioned. Statistics from the Employment Secu-rity Commission show in February of this year compared to Janu-ary of 2009 there were 222,016 fewer people em-ployed in North Carolina.

January 2009 - 4,101,316February 2011 - 3,879,300Those totals reflect the number

of those employed in non-farm jobs. The drop in the employment number came at the same time the U.S. Cen-sus Bureau indicated a continued posi-tive growth in the population of North Carolina.

The employment dip came also after the former Gov. Mike Easley ad-ministration, and Perdue’s administra-tion, approved millions of dollars of in-centives to convince businesses to come to North Carolina or expand. The One North Carolina Fund, which is con-trolled by the governor, has disbursed nearly $46 million to companies since

Easley started using the fund. The latest quarterly report claims

the incentives from the governor’s fund created 38,580 jobs since 1993. But that number is difficult to nail down because some have been lost since then and some are yet to be created. Fur-thermore, the tax incentive program called the Job Development Invest-

ment Grant (JDIG) just this past year obligated $16.3

million in tax breaks to five compa-nies. The most recent quarterly report indicates 584 jobs would be created by those companies. That is a prom-ise stretched over the course of several years. For example, SPX Corporation vowed to create 180 jobs but it’s over a period of now and 2015.

Much like the One North Caro-lina Fund, many companies receiving JDIG support fail to deliver on their promises. The 2009 JDIG annual re-port notes 13 companies withdrew from the program or the deals were terminated.

Lawmakers are apparently having trouble compiling accurate numbers of

new jobs involved in these “economic development” schemes. The Republi-can House budget, however, contains a provision requiring the Department of Commerce to compile a database tracking incentives and real jobs creat-

ed and make it available to the public. Political meddling in the economy

is a bad idea to begin with. But at min-imum the government owes the public more transparency regarding the prom-ises being made with our tax dollars. w

Do you approve or disapprove of the job Bev Perdue is

doing as Governor?

Civitas Poll March 2011

Approve 40% Disapprove 52%Not sure 8%



Smart Start Funding Could Face the Budget Knife BY ANDREW HENSON

Several weeks ago, the N.C. House rolled out their preliminary options for balancing the biennium budget. In-cluded in their options were sweeping structural and monetary changes for a significant number of state programs, in-cluding some common-sense reforms for Smart Start, North Carolina’s non-profit childcare vehicle.

The original proposal for Smart Start included a series of important changes to its administrative structure – a system renowned for encumbering overhead – by reducing overhead expenditures and allowing the program to be more locally funded.

Since its debut, however, the Smart Start reform package has incrementally lost most of the arrows in its quiver, leaving the final product a shell of its former self. Noteworthy reforms not

making it into the House’s final budget plan include a change that would more strictly limit Smart Start administrative expenses, and a mandate for Smart Start to double its reliance on private support.

The House’s original proposal made positive in-roads toward curbing exces-sive administrative costs from the Smart Start organization – including removing childcare subsidy funds from counting under Smart Start’s 8 percent administra-tive formula. That provision would have prevented millions of dollars of critical funding from being tied up in adminis-trative costs, allowing more funding to be delivered to needy children. This provi-sion was cut from the final version of the House’s budget bill.

Smart Start routinely receives money from the state government and returns that money to the state government’s Departments of Social Services (DSS)

to administer childcare subsidies, en-abling Smart Start to take more than 8 percent of that funding as overhead. The local DSS administers identical childcare subsidies at a considerably lower admin-istrative rate (5.33 percent compared to Smart Start’s 8 percent).

Curiously, while Smart Start’s 8 per-cent administrative formula was main-tained, the county Departments of Social Services had their administrative budget reduced from 5 to 4 percent, saving over $3 million.

Another provision in the original House budget proposal included increas-ing Smart Start’s private matching com-ponent by 10 percent. Currently, Smart Start gets 90 percent of their funding from the government and 10 percent from private donations. The original pro-posal would have increased the private donations match to 20 percent of the

Smart Start budget, allowing Smart Start to become less reliant on the government and get local organizations more involved in its funding. The final budget proposal, however, reduced the private matching increase down to just 13 percent.

A seemingly positive reform that was included in the House’s final budget is a salary cap of state funding of $80,000 for North Carolina Partnership for Children administrators and $60,000 for Local Partnership administrators. However, Smart Start administrators will still be able to supplement their funding with private contributions, making it relative-ly easy for these salary caps to be circum-vented.

Overall Smart Start would receive a 20 percent reduction in funding under the final House budget plan, a reduction amounting to about $36 million for fis-cal year 11-12. w

State Lawmakers Take Another Swing at State Health Plan FixBY BRIAN BALFOUR

In mid-April Gov. Perdue vetoed a sensible bill aimed at helping to shore up North Carolina’s financially-strapped State Health Plan. The State Health Plan is the health insurance plan that covers state employees and retirees. Cur-rently, active and retired state employees are enrolled into the State Health Plan at no cost to them. Their premiums are completely covered by taxpayers.

Senate Bill 265, “State Health Plan/Appropriations and Transfers,” would have re-quired state employees and retirees to contribute a small amount to help finance their enrollment in the State Health Plan, which is currently deeply under water financially.

According to the bill’s fiscal note, asking state workers and retirees to contribute about $11 or $22 per month (depending on their level of coverage) along with mild in-creases in co-pays would save taxpayers more than $400 million over the next two budget years.

Gov. Perdue, however, decided in-stead to continue to burden taxpayers for this generous benefit for state work-ers and retirees. Perdue defended her veto in a press release by comparing the minor contribution to health insurance premiums to a “tax on teachers.” Ac-cording to Perdue: “This bill is in effect a tax on teachers, who have not received a pay raise – and have effectively seen their pay drop – for the past three years. In 2008, North Carolina ranked 25th in the nation in teachers’ salaries. By 2011, we have dropped to 45th. Now is simply not the time to cut teachers’ pay yet again. To do so would be a tremen-dous step backward for North Carolina, and we know clearly that teachers will flee the profession at a time when edu-cation is most critical to the future of this state.”

The State Health Plan has been in dire straights the last few years, and it is projected it will need to be bailed out by taxpayers again to the tune of an ad-ditional $515 million over the next two years to cover benefits. SB 265 would

have saved taxpayers from shouldering the load again, but Perdue vetoed the bill to side with a special interest group she wants to make sure continues to support her re-election campaign.

Furthermore, the commitment to fully subsidize the premiums of retirees on the State Health Plan has resulted in a massive, and growing, $33 billion un-funded liability that will need to be ad-dressed in future years. This unfunded

liability represents the pres-ent value of benefits that

will need to be paid out over the next 30 years to state retirees. The $33 bil-lion amount was calculated as of the end of 2009, and is up almost $10 billion from the $24 billion calculated in the first report on the liability as of the end of 2005. That’s a stunning 38 percent increase in this massive liability in just four years, and it is sure to continue growing unless the Legislature and Gov-ernor address it.

In response to Perdue’s veto, the state Senate crafted Senate Bill 323, “State Health Plan/Appropriations and Transfers II,” which included simi-lar provisions with only a few minor changes to HB 265. The most notable change is a slight reduction in the pre-mium co-pay for Medicare eligible state retirees. As this paper went to press, a conference committee compromise ver-sion of the bill was just approved by the House. The House approval means the

bill moves to Gov. Perdue’s desk for ap-proval or veto.

It is quite clear that the State Health Plan is on an unsustainable path and re-quires sensible reforms including cost sharing by state employees and retirees to avoid countless taxpayer bailouts in the future. Gov. Perdue’s rejection of HB 265, however, signals her will-ingness to merely kick the can further down the road.

Legislative leaders were right to take another swing at reforming the State Health Plan in the form of SB 323.

Currently, the state pays for all of the state employees’

and teacher’s health insurance costs.

This year, the state legislature passed

a bill requiring state employees and teachers

to pay between $11 and $22 each month for their health insurance.

Do you think state employees and teachers should continue receiving free

health insurance? Or pay between $11 and $22 a month?


Continue receiving free 35%Pay between $11 and $12 62%Not sure 3%

IN FAVOR OF STATE EMPLOYEES PAYING PREMIUMSSB 323

House Republicans (66)Avila Barnhart Blust Boles Bradley BrawleyBrown, L Brown, R Brubaker Burr Cleveland CollinsCook Current Daughtry Dixon Dockham DollarFaircloth Folwell Frye Gillespie Guice HagerHastings Hilton Hollo Holloway Horn HowardHurley Iler Ingle Johnson Jones JordanJustice Langdon LaRoque Lewis McComas McCormickMcElraft McGee McGrady Mills Moffitt Moore, TMurry Pridgen Randleman Rhyne Sager SamuelsonSanderson Setzer Shepard Stam Starnes SteenStevens Stone Tillis Torbett Warren, H West

House Democrats (0)

AGAINST STATE EMPLOYEES PAYING PREMIUMS

House Republicans (1)Blackwell

House Democrats (52)Adams Alexander, K Alexander, M Bell Bordsen BrandonBrisson Bryant Carney Cotham Crawford Earle

Faison Farmer-Butterfield Fisher Floyd Gill Glazier

Goodman Graham Hackney Haire Hall HamiltonHarrison Hill Insko Jackson Jeffus KeeverLucas Luebke Martin McGuirt McLawhorn MichauxMobley Moore, R Owens Parfitt Parmon PierceRapp Ross Spear Tolson Wainwright Warren, EWeiss Wilkins Womble Wray

NOT VOTING (0) ABSENT (1)House Killian (R)

Sponsors Roll CallApodaca (R) House #450

This compromise bill was approved by the House as this edition of Capitol Connection went to press. It is up to Gov. Perdue to sign it or veto it.

Recent polling by the Civitas Institute reveals that 62 percent of North Caro-linians would like to see state employees and retirees contribute a share towards their health insurance premiums, with only 35 percent opposed to the idea.

Time will tell if Perdue will approve sensible State Health Plan reform in line with the will of a majority of North Carolinians, or if she will opt for scoring more political points with an influential special interest group at the expense of taxpayers. w



Tobacco Settlement Funds ShufflingBY MATT WILLOUGHBY

The spending plan written by House Republicans would significant-ly change who would make the deci-sions about how the proceeds from the national tobacco settlement are used. The Health and Wellness Trust Fund and the Tobacco Trust Fund were set up to use funds from the settlement to help communities that were depen-dent on the tobacco industry and ad-dress health problems associated with tobacco.

There have been plenty of com-plaints the commissions overseeing those funds were not doing enough. The House budget would abolish those trust funds and commissions and turn the oversight over to the state Board of Agriculture under the

leadership of Agriculture Commis-sioner Steve Troxler. Part of the pro-ceeds would be earmarked to pay off state debt. Some would go to the Uni-versity Cancer Research Fund.

The House budget would also di-rect the new board to make sure those “engaged in tobacco-related business-es” and communities are compensated for losses from the demise of the to-bacco industry – continuing the focus of the currently existing Funds.

The Golden LEAF Foundation – which receives and spends the other half of the settlement payments – would still exist but millions of dol-lars would be diverted to the General Fund to make up for a budget short-fall.

The budget also would shift the

Division of Forest Resources from the Department of Environment and Natural Resources to the Agriculture Department. The regulation of milk products would also go to the Agri-culture Department. A number of en-vironmental regulation jobs would be eliminated. The Board of Agriculture would take over many of the duties of the Environmental Management Commission. There were complaints the commission was overreaching and stifling growth in areas such as agri-culture.

A new Department of Public Safety would be established with the consolidation of the Departments of Correction, Crime and Public Safety and Juvenile Justice. That move would eliminate nearly 1,200 positions but

over 600 new positions would be cre-ated for expanding prisons. Fifteen new administrative jobs would also be created for the new department.

This may not be the end of the reorganization of state government. There will be studies during the pe-riod between sessions of the General Assembly to look at changing the public education sector and whether continued funding is justified for state programs or even some agencies. The reviews will be done by the same law-makers who write the budget so this expanded process of scrutiny could be pre-cursor to the zero-based budget-ing promised by Republicans. Look for many more changes coming in the next legislative session. w

IN FAVOR OF RECOGNIZING UNBORN VICTIM RIGHTSHB 215

Senate Republicans (30)Allran Apodaca Berger, P Bingham Blake BrockBrown Brunstetter Clary Daniel Davis EastForrester Goolsby Gunn Harrington Hartsell HiseHunt Jackson Meredith Newton Pate RabonRouzer Rucho Soucek Stevens Tillman Tucker

Senate Democrats (15)Berger, D Blue Clodfelter Dannelly Garrou GrahamJenkins Jones Mansfield McKissick Purcell RobinsonVaughan Walters White

AGAINST RECOGNIZING UNBORN VICTIM RIGHTS

Senate Republicans (0)

Senate Democrats (4)Atwater Kinnaird Nesbitt Stein

NOT VOTING (0) ABSENT (1)Senate Preston (R)

Roll Call Senate #185

BY KAREN DUQUETTEBY MATT WILLOUGHBY

Any criminal defendant who injures or kills a fetus at any stage of development will now face sepa-rate criminal charges for both the mother and fetus in North Carolina. The Unborn Victims of Violence Act (UVVA), or Ethen’s Law (HB 215) passed both chambers and was signed into law on April 29, 2011 by Governor Perdue. While the bill does not apply to legal abortions, it conveys legal status to any fetus un-able to survive outside their mother’s womb.

Ethen’s Law was named after the unborn son of Jennifer Nielsen, who was murdered along with her unborn baby in 2007. “This bill was about the invisible: the women of NC who have been murdered — some high profile, some not — in many cases because they were pregnant,” Rep. Dale Folwell (R-Forsyth) stated. “We know that Ethen’s law will pun-ish, and if it prevents one death, it will be worth it.”

The North Carolina Senate passed Senate Bill 709, “Energy Jobs Act,” in early May, with a bi-partisan majority vote. The act directs Gov. Bev Perdue to enter into an energy compact with neighboring states Virginia and South Carolina. The compact would develop strategies for exploring offshore and inland renewable energy sources.

Unborn Victims Recognized in General Assembly

Offshore Natural Gas Drilling Would Create 6,700 New Jobs

Under the state legislation, the killing of an unborn child at any stage of development will be defined as murder, a Class A felony, punish-able by life in prison without parole. The UVVA also includes provisions for acts in which the unborn child is harmed during the commission of a crime against the mother but do not result in death. Furthermore, the bill does not require that the attack-er know the woman was pregnant in order to face criminal charges for the fetus’ injuries.

The House voted 62-47 to pass the measure in April. For the House vote box, read the April Civitas Capi-tol Connection.

Ethen’s Law will take effect Dec. 1, 2011 when North Carolina will join 35 other states and the federal government in recognizing a fetus as an additional victim of crime. North Carolina will be the 26th state to in-clude complete coverage, providing legal status to the fetus at any time after conception. w

Announced in April, the bill’s sponsors acknowledged that explo-ration of renewable energy sources would take up to 10 years before any production occurs. The exploration is estimated to make a $500 million impact on the state’s economy and create thousands of jobs.

DrillingContinued on Pg. 8

Do you support or oppose drilling for oil and natural gas off the coast of North Carolina?

Civitas Poll August 2010

Strongly Support 24%Somewhat Support 27%Somewhat Oppose 11%Strongly Oppose 27%

Bill sponsor, Sen. Bob Rucho (R-Mecklenburg), said on the day the bill was filed, which happened to be the one year anniversary of the BP Gulf oil spill, “what we did learn from this disaster is we learned from our mistakes. The industry found ways to make sure that oil explora-tion and production can be done in

a very safe manner.”A couple of Demo-

crats, because of the oil spill in the Gulf, opposed the idea once it made its way to the Senate for a floor vote. Rucho

countered, “you don’t shut down air-

lines because of one ac-cident.”

Based on research conduct-ed by the Legislative Research Com-mission’s Advisory Committee and a report conducted by the Southeast Energy Alliance, North Carolina has ample natural gas offshore that would create long-term jobs and bring significant revenue to the state.

The act explains other sources of energy that have been studied,



NCAE CompContinued from Pg. 1

Annexation Reform is Close to Being a Done DealBY MATT WILLOUGHBY

House Finance Committee mem-bers recently approved an annexation bill that took a long time in the making to please all parties involved. In terms of what is in it and who it will affect, House Bill 845, “Annexation Reform Act of 2011,” a Republican sponsored bill, went through a lot of negotia-tions between sponsors, Democrats and the League of Municipalities before it gained the traction to go forward to Legislators for a full vote.

The latest hurdle to advancing the bill was an argument broached by Dem-ocrats that low-income communities – distressed areas – were being neglected water and sewer services. In North Car-olina, when an area is annexed, state law requires that cities provide water and

sewer services within two years of the annexation. Annexed residents are the ones who foot the bill for installation of services, and “hook up” fee to new water and sewer lines.

The annexation reform act, sup-ported by grassroots activists, now requires annexation if 51 percent of households in a community next to a city are 200 percent of the federal pover-ty level, then the city could be required to annex that community. Before the annexation, however, there would have to first be a study to determine if the city could afford the addition.

That language was introduced by Rep. Angela Bryant (D-Nash). She had submitted House Bill 907, “Commu-nity Inclusion and Development Act,” which defined annexation in cases of

distressed areas. A provision that still re-mains in the bill is the provision that if 60 percent of property owners in a com-munity reject an annexation, then the city would have to hold off for at least 36 months. A city would also have to pay the full cost of providing services to the property owners who request them early in the annexation process.

Annexation reform started with re-quiring a referendum on any annexation and approval by county commissioners. It would have also required cities to pay the cost of providing services. That lan-guage was quickly withdrawn, and then brought back.

As the debate played out, Rep. Steve LaRoque (R-Lenoir), HB 845 bill spon-sor, negotiated with the League of Mu-nicipalities – a non-partisan federation

of more than 540 cities, towns and vil-lages in North Carolina – and eventually settled on a compromise. Democrats in the House Finance Committee wanted to add a provision in the bill to force cit-ies to annex low income communities so those areas would receive city services they wanted. The Democrats claimed cities purposely bypassed distressed ar-eas. Instead of just property owners, a couple of Democrats said residents who don’t own their property should also be able to petition for annexation.

LaRoque’s compromise bill still faces scrutiny in the Senate where a bill proposing a flat out moratorium on any annexations sits waiting in a committee. No annexation reform votes had been cast by the time this publication went to print. w

The North Carolina Association of Educators represents public school employees and is affiliated with the National Association of Educators, the national teachers union. In 2008 the N.C.A.E and N.E.A spent millions of

dollars supporting Bev Perdue for Governor and are now criticizing the North Carolina legislature’s current attempts at education reform such as increasing

the number of public charter schools available in the state. With that in mind, please tell me which of the following comes closer to your own opinions:


Trust the NCAE to do the right thing and give both educators and our children a strong voice. 31%

Not Sure 16%

Do not trust the N.C.A.E. because they are making too many demands and seem to be more concerned with increasing their mem-bership and raising their political clout, not with educating our children. 53%

Name 2009 Salary+ Comp= Total

Rodney EllisVice President

$111,696+ $59,666= $171,362

John FergusonMemb. Mgr.

$119,122+ $50,409= $169,530

Claudia WilliamsLegal Serv. Mgr.

$112,430+ $49,020= $161,450

Name 2009 Salary+ Comp= Total

Angela FarthingTeach & Learn. Mgr.

$109,879+ $48,048= $157,927

Sheri StricklandNCAE President

$143,607+ $7,227= $150,834

AVERAGE TOTAL COMPENSATION: $176,796

NCAE Rally: The Left is Still in Charge BY BOB LUEBKE

On a bright May afternoon the North Carolina Association of Edu-cators (NCAE) gathered hun-

dreds of teachers for a rally across from the General Assembly building to protest passage of a $19 billion House budget plan. The plan fully funds teacher positions, and calls for $759 million in budget reductions for K-12 public schools.

NCAE members, many wearing red t-shirts with the words “Unite. Organize. Empower,” heard from

politicians and union lead-ers, who encouraged

them to fight against job losses and bud-get cuts. Remarks by government officials and repre senta t i ve s of left-leaning

groups trumpeted NCAE’s message of

government control, focus on money, staffing ,

and inputs, and strident opposition to school reform efforts.

Speaking about how the history of North Carolina is still being writ-ten, Gov. Per-due told NCAE members, “This chapter belongs to us. These chil-

dren belong to us. … You their edu-cators belong to us.”

Trying to calm fears about the budget situation, and its impact on public schools, Perdue told the crowd, “Don’t worry about this mess in Raleigh … Don’t worry about this mess in Raleigh … Pick up your phones, families out there and moms and dads out there and call your leg-islators and let them know that you want the legislature to stand up for the educators of North Carolina.”

William Barber, President of the North Carolina Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), urged the crowd to fight back against anyone who supported

current policies that cut bud-gets or layoff teachers. He

made no mistake over who

he considered to be the cause of all the current troubles.

“Today, in our General Assem-bly, a political extreme right wing ultra conservative tea party, Art Pope -financed wants to go backwards,” Barber said.

Barber even questioned legisla-tors who dare to question the direc-tion or funding of public schools. “Legislators who come from poor communities that got the nerve to cut public education – it’s wrong and backwards and we must fight it.”

The rally provided NCAE a chance to flex its political muscle and attempt to display a broaden-ing base of support. A number of

RallyContinued on Pg. 8

Hundreds of North Carolina Association of Educators supporters gathered in the Legislative Mall to rally troops in favor of maintaining and increasing spending for North Carolina Public Schools. Photo: Raleigh News & Observer

Which strategy do you think would be more effective at improving public education in North Carolina?


Increasing government spending on the current system 31%Allowing parents more choice over which school their child can attend 55%Other 6%Not Sure 8%



Unemployment Declining while Unemployment Insurance Debt Continues to Increase

BY MARIANNE SUAREZ

The latest Statewide Unemploy-ment Report from the North Caro-lina Employment Security Commis-sion paints a rosy picture of declining unemployment rates across the state. In March, the unemployment rate decreased in 99 out of the state’s 100 counties. The only county experienc-ing a percentage gain in unemploy-ment was Greene County. Unemploy-

ment rates also decreased in all 14 of the state’s metropolitan areas for the second month in a row. Orange County had the state’s lowest unem-ployment rate at 6.1 percent, while Graham County had the highest at 16.4 percent.

These numbers definitely high-light a positive trend toward dimin-ishing unemployment figures. How-ever, of the 100 counties in North

Carolina only 35 were at or below the state’s average unemployment rate of 9.7 percent, which is a stark reminder that we still have a long way to go. The good news is the state unemployment rate is slowly decreasing, by 0.4 per-cent from the previous month and by 1.8 percent in the last year.

It is important to note that al-though the unemployment rates seem to be on a steady track in the right di-

State Unemployment Rates, March 2011Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics

rection, the same cannot be said for North Carolina’s unemployment in-surance debt. Unemployment insur-ance claims totaled 33,203 in March, which is an increase of 1,339 since February. Total statewide Unemploy-ment Insurance Benefits reached $5 billion in North Carolina in March, adding substantial stress to the state’s already strained budget. w

Dare15.3

Hyde11.0

Pitt9.5

Carteret8.8

Wake7.4

Pender10.2

Bladen11.4

Duplin8.5

Bertie11.7

Onslow8.4

Wilkes12.0

Moore8.7

Beaufort10.2

Craven9.7

Union8.8

Halifax12.0

Robeson12.2

Nash11.4

Sampson8.3

Brunswick10.9

Surry10.7

Iredell10.6

Tyrrell11.6

Johnston8.9

Wayne8.2

Ashe12.3

Anson12.3

Harnett10.6

Randolph10.3

Guilford9.9

Hoke9.3

Rowan10.9

Stokes9.7

Warren12.5

Person10.4

Caswell10.4

Forsyth9.2

Yadkin10.2

Columbus12.0

Swain16.3

Burke12.0 Chatham

6.5

Macon11.9

Jones9.0

Martin10.5

Pamlico9.4

Lee11.8

Stanly10.7 Lenoir

10.2

Buncombe7.7

Franklin9.9

Davidson10.9

Granville9.5

Haywood10.1

Gates6.8

Jackson9.2

Currituck7.8

Caldwell12.4

Orange6.1

Wilson11.8

Polk7.8

Cumberland9.1

Madison9.7

Rutherford13.9 Gaston

11.1Clay10.0

Cherokee12.9

Catawba11.7

Davie9.7

Cleveland11.7

Richmond12.5

McDowell12.3

Rockingham11.5

Vance12.5

Alamance9.9

Hertford9.4

Yancey11.4

Avery11.4

Edgecombe14.5

Mecklenburg10.0

Northampton11.3

Lincoln11.1 Montgomery

11.7Cabarrus

9.8

Graham16.4

Durham7.4

Camden8.4

Greene10.5

Scotland15.9

Watauga8.1

Washington11.5

Henderson7.9

Transylvania9.0

Chowan10.5

Mitchell11.5

Perquimans10.2

Alexander10.7

New Hanover9.0

Pasquotank8.9

Alleghany12.2

6.1 - 8.1

8.2 - 9.5

9.6 - 11.1

11.2 - 12.9

13.0 - 16.4

March 2011

9.7%

7.1% 7.7% 8.1% 8.2% 8.4% 9.1% 9.4% 9.6% 9.7% 9.9% 10.1% 10.4% 11.9% 12.5%

0.0%

2.0%

4.0%

6.0%

8.0%

10.0%

12.0%

14.0%

North

Carolina

Durha

m/Chapell Hill

Raleigh/Cary

Asheville

Golds

boro

Jackso

nville

FayeKe

ville

Winston

-‐Salem

Greenville

Wilming

ton

Burlin

gton

Greensboro/

High P

oint

CharloK

e/Gast

onia/Rock Hill NC/SC

Hickory/

Lenoir/ Morg

anton

Rocky

Mount



Know someone who’sMade A Difference?

The Civitas Citizen of the Month is an award given to recognize a person who has had an impact on state or local policy debate,

provided information to the public, or otherwise had a noteworthy accomplishment. The Citizen of the Month will be recognized at

our monthly poll luncheons and honored with a gift.

If you know someone who fits the definition and has given of their time for a constitutional, free-market society based on liberty,

please email [email protected].

Washington County Votes in New Election for SheriffBY SUSAN MYRICK

As of print, so far 600 people have voted in Washington County in the new election for sheriff called for by the North Carolina State Board of Elections. One-Stop voting began on Thursday, May 5, 2011. The new Election Day is May 24, 2011.

In the November General Elec-tion, a total of 4,578 people voted in the sheriff ’s race. 2,291 votes were cast for incumbent sheriff, James (Smiley) Ross (Dem), and 2,287 votes went to the challenger, Grego-ry (Greg) Hassell (Rep). Only four votes separated these two candidates.

On February 24, 2011, the State

Board of Elections held a teleconfer-ence and “acknowledged that there are sufficient irregularities to taint the results of the election and re-moves all doubts of the fairness of the election,” ordering a new elec-tion.

Here are a few of the irregulari-ties in the Washington County Sher-iff ’s election of November 2, 2010 found in the teleconference official minutes.

• Three weeks after the elec-tion an absentee ballot was found that had not been counted previous-ly;

• Fifteen (15) absentee bal-lots were mishandled being placed in a lock box left out on a shelf and not counted until after the Washing-ton County Board of Elections had adjourned the meeting on Election Day for the counting of absentee

self-identified Republicans, includ-ing Don Martin, Superintendent of the Winston-Salem Forsyth County Schools, spoke at the event.

Before the program began, a contingent of up to 40 activists from the radical youth socialist group, “Raleigh F.I.S.T,” were cheered as they marched onto bicentennial mall. shouting “stop the cuts to public education and fully fund all of NC’s schools.”

Several Civitas Institute staff also attended the rally and distrib-uted copies of a flier titled: “NCAE: Looking out for Children, Members or Itself?” The document reported how from 2006 to 2009 compen-

sation for top NCAE executives in-creased at a rate twice that of the average North Carolina teacher. Civitas staff members were told by police that fliers could only be dis-tributed from locations outside the perimeter of the mall where the rally was held.

Staff continued to distribute fliers to teachers making their way to the rally. Several NCAE officials confiscated information from par-ticipants as soon as they entered the main rally area. w

Rally

Drilling

CONTINUED FROM PG 6

CONTINUED FROM PG 5

yet those sources – such as wind – do not supply a quantifiable result of reliable energy. The research con-ducted on offshore natural gas drill-ing includes:

- 6,700 new jobs created- $659 million annually to

the State’s Gross Domestic Product over three decades

- $10 billion in cost sharing of government revenues at an aver-age of $484 million per year to the State

The act recommends that North Carolina participate cooperatively with Virginia and South Carolina. Royalties and revenue would be div-vied up in North Carolina as:

- 25 percent credited to General Fund

- 20 percent credited to Highway Trust Fund

- 15 percent transferred to Community Colleges System Office to establish and manage a fund for curriculum development and imple-mentation as well as financial assis-tance for students attending com-munity college to receive vocational

training through this curriculum in fields directly related to energy ex-ploration and development and re-lated energy infrastcture

- 15 percent transferred to the UNC Board of Governors to establish and manage research and development fund for programs di-rectly related to energy research and development

- 15 percent transferred to Department of Environment and Natural Resources for coastal conser-vation, including, but not limited to, beach and inlet management proj-ects, channel navigation and main-tenance, public beach and water ac-cess, water quality management, as well as fisheries and shellfish restora-tion

- 5 percent transferred to State Port Authority for expansion and maintenance of State Port in-frastructure associated with energy-related commerce

- 5 percent transferred to the Department of Commerce for recruitment of energy-related indus-tries to the State

The bill passed 38-12. It now goes to the House for a vote. w

Greg Hassell (R, left) and James Ross (D, right) are squaring off this month in a new election for County Sheriff.

IN FAVOR OF CREATING ENERGY JOBSSB 709

Senate Republicans (31)Allran Apodaca Berger, P Bingham Blake BrockBrown Brunstetter Clary Daniel Davis EastForrester Goolsby Gunn Harrington Hartsell HiseHunt Jackson Meredith Newton Pate PrestonRabon Rouzer Rucho Soucek Stevens TillmanTucker

Senate Democrats (7)Atwater Clodfelter Garrou Jenkins McKissick SteinWalters

AGAINST CREATING ENERGY JOBS

Senate Republicans (0)

Senate Democrats (12)Berger, D Blue Dannelly Graham Jones KinnairdMansfield Nesbitt Purcell Robinson Vaughan White

Sponsors Rucho (R) Brown (R) Tucker (R)

Roll Call Senate #294

ballots; • Considerable confusion of

seven (7) voters’ eligibility that ap-peared on voter history list after the election;

• Considerable confusion in the reconciliation of voters voting to ballots cast and some records appar-ently were not scanned and did not appear on the voter history records.

• Considerable confusion about identified deceased voters and the county board of elections’ voter registration records;

• Questions regarding report-ed improper assistance to residents at a disability center;

• Provision voter Michelle Armstrong was not on listed on the poll book and fed her provisional ballot into the tabulator at the poll-ing place.

Liberals and Progressives like to argue that there is no voter fraud in North Carolina – especially no vot-er impersonation fraud. Of course this is a silly argument because it is impossible to prove (or disprove) the presence of voter impersonation fraud without a photo ID require-ment.

The 2010 Washington County election for sheriff is a great example of why we need voter photo ID leg-islation. It is also a good illustration of how the State Board of Elections avoids investigations into apparent voter fraud, thus perpetuating the myth that there is no voter fraud in North Carolina. w



Voter IDCONTINUED FROM PG 1

tion. We do not require identity veri-fication when one registers to vote; we vote in remote locations far from our homes and the people who know us; we begin voting two and one half weeks before Election Day; and we allow people to register and vote on the same day (Same-Day Registra-tion).

The State Senate will have an

opportunity to fine-tune the voter ID bill and perhaps make the ID requirements less ambiguous and at the same time remove the language that awards so much power and free-dom to the State Board of Elections to interpret and develop the law to suit the majority on the State Board of Elections.

As expected, the vote to give a favorable report to House Bill 351 went along party lines - 18 Repub-licans voted for the bill while 14

Global TransPark – Money Pit for North CarolinaBY KAREN DUQUETTE

The General Assembly’s Pro-gram Evaluation Division recently revealed its report findings on the Lenoir County Global TransPark (GTP) industrial complex. The re-port suggested North Carolina has two options – either continue to fund it based on a demonstration of results or begin incrementally divest-ing funds from the park.

GTP has received nearly $250 million from local, state, federal and private sources since it began in 1991 but has yet to make a profit since opening its doors 20 years ago. According to report estimates, the state’s investment will surpass the park’s “value,” primarily through expected job income taxes, until at least 2025. Until then, the costs will continue to exceed its benefits and will require additional funding each year just to remain operable.

The report also confirmed the GTP is unlikely to be self-sufficient with its operating expenses still ex-ceeding operating revenues. As a re-sult, it will continue to rely on state appropriations into the foreseeable future in addition to its inability to

pay its escheat fund debt, forcing the state to absorb these costs.

Furthermore, the report found the GTP lacks a clear measurable results and performance program. The GTP doesn’t have an internal management system that monitors whether progress and goals are being

met. And although the N.C. Depart-ment of Commerce and the regional economic development board mar-ket the GTP, less than 10 percent of its own staff focuses on economic development.

Currently, the GTP has only 14 tenants who supply roughly 400

jobs. Some job growth from Spirit AeroSystems is expected in the next few years, due largely in part to the $100 million in incentives from the state’s share of tobacco settlement funds for onsite building upgrades.

These numbers fall significantly short of the 1994 master plan to cre-ate 3,600 jobs within five years. The report claims part of this shortfall is due to a lack of accessible transporta-tion infrastructure, which would ne-cessitate additional taxpayer money to improve the roads and rails lead-ing to the park.

With the results of this report, it’s hard to justify GTP’s contin-ued state financial support given the exorbitant costs currently being thrown at it.

Unfortunately, even if North Carolina decides to incrementally divest funds from the GTP, the state may have some financial obligations until 2019 due to existing contracts with Spirit AeroSystem and the Fed-eral Aviation Administration.

This seems like a raw deal and money pit for North Carolinians. The sooner we can begin the divest-ment process, the better. w

Democrats voted against it. Though this vote and probably all subsequent votes on voter ID legislation will probably follow the party line, it is anything but a partisan issue to the voters of North Carolina.

In poll after poll, national and state, the voters overwhelmingly support voter photo ID legislation in order to protect the integrity of our elections. A Civitas Poll con-ducted in December 2010 showed that an amazing 84 percent of North

Carolina voters favored legislation that would require voter photo ID. Broken down, 96 percent of Repub-licans, 86 percent of Unaffiliated voters and 73 percent of Democrats support a voter photo ID to vote.

The Republicans in the State House and State Senate promised to pass voter photo ID legislation in the first 100 days of the 2011 session – they have moved one step closer to their goal. w

The Global Transpark has received nearly $250 million to get the longest runway East of the Mississippi up and running. They have yet to turn a profit since it opened 20 years ago. Some job growth is expected from Spirit AeroSystems in the next few years. Photo: Don Carrington.

Please feel free to cut this out and send to your legislator. Your legislator’s contact information can be found on pages 10-11.

nccivitas.org

CAPITOL CONNECTIONCivitas10 February 2011

1 Camden, Currituck, Pasquotank, Tyrrell Bill Owens (D)Rm. 611, 300 N. Salisbury [email protected]

2 Chowan, Dare, Hyde, Washington Timothy L. Spear (D)Rm. 402, 300 N. Salisbury [email protected]

3 Craven, Pamlico Norman W. Sanderson (R)Rm. 306A2, 300 N. Salisbury [email protected]

4 Duplin, Onslow Jimmy Dixon (R)Rm. 1002, 16 West Jones [email protected]

5 Bertie, Gates, Hertford, Perquimans Annie W. Mobley (D)Rm. 501, 300 N. Salisbury [email protected]

6 Beaufort, Pitt Bill Cook (R)Rm. 1303, 16 West Jones [email protected]

7 Halifax, Nash Angela R. Bryant (D)Rm. 542, 300 N. Salisbury [email protected]

8 Martin, Pitt Edith D. Warren (D)Rm. 1323, 16 West Jones [email protected]

9 Pitt Marian N. McLawhorn (D)Rm. 1217, 16 West Jones [email protected]

10 Greene, Lenoir, Wayne Stephen A. LaRoque (R)Rm. 635, 300 N. Salisbury [email protected]

11 Wayne Efton M. Sager (R)Rm. 416B, 300 N. Salisbury [email protected]

12 Craven, Lenoir William L. Wainwright (D)Rm. 613, 300 N. Salisbury [email protected]

13 Carteret, Jones Pat McElraft (R)Rm. 637, 300 N. Salisbury [email protected]

14 Onslow George G. Cleveland (R)Rm. 417A, 300 N. Salisbury [email protected]

15 Onslow Phil R. Shepard (R)Rm. 301N, 300 N. Salisbury St.919-715-9644Phil. [email protected]

16 New Hanover, Pender Carolyn H. Justice (R)Rm. 420, 300 N. Salisbury [email protected]

17 Brunswick Frank Iler (R)Rm. 632, 300 N. Salisbury [email protected]

18 New Hanover, Pender Susi H. Hamilton (D)Rm. 1319, 16 West Jones [email protected]

19 New Hanover Daniel F. McComas (R)Rm. 506, 300 N. Salisbury [email protected]

20 Brunswick, Columbus Dewey L. Hill (D)Rm. 1309, 16 West Jones [email protected]

21 Sampson, Wayne Larry M. Bell (D)Rm. 606, 300 N. Salisbury [email protected]

22 Bladen, Cumberland William D. Brisson (D)Rm. 1325, 16 West Jones [email protected]

23 Edgecombe, Wilson Joe P. Tolson (D)Rm. 608, 300 N. Salisbury [email protected]

24 Edgecombe, Wilson Jean Farmer-Butterfield (D)Rm. 631D, 300 N. Salisbury [email protected]

25 Nash Jeff Collins (R)Rm. 1006, 16 West Jones [email protected]

26 Johnston N. Leo Daughtry (R)Rm. 2207, 16 West Jones [email protected]

27 Northhampton, Vance, Warren Michael H. Wray (D)Rm. 502, 300 N. Salisbury [email protected]

28 Johnston, Sampson James H. Langdon, Jr. (R)Rm. 417B, 300 N. Salisbury [email protected]

29 Durham Larry D. Hall (D)Rm. 1015, 16 West Jones [email protected]

30 Durham Paul Luebke (D)Rm. 513, 300 N. Salisbury [email protected]

31 Durham Henry M. Michaux, Jr. (D)Rm. 1220, 16 West Jones [email protected]

32 Granville, Vance James W. Crawford, Jr. (D)Rm. 1321, 16 West Jones [email protected]

33 Wake Rosa U. Gill (D)Rm. 1305, 16 West Jones [email protected]

34 Wake Grier Martin (D)Rm. 1219, 16 West Jones [email protected]

35 Wake Jennifer Weiss (D)Rm. 1109, 16 West Jones [email protected]

36 Wake Nelson Dollar (R)Rm. 307B1, 300 N. Salisbury [email protected]

37 Wake Paul Stam (R)Rm. 2301, 16 West Jones [email protected]

38 Wake Deborah K. Ross (D)Rm. 1023, 16 West Jones [email protected]

39 Wake Darren G. Jackson (D)Rm. 1019, 16 West Jones [email protected]

40 Wake Marilyn Avila (R)Rm. 2217, 16 West Jones [email protected]

41 Wake Tom Murry (R)Rm. 2121, 16 West Jones [email protected]

42 Cumberland Marvin W. Lucas (D)Rm. 607, 300 N. Salisbury [email protected]

43 Cumberland Elmer Floyd (D)Rm. 1311, 16 West Jones [email protected]

44 Cumberland Diane Parfitt (D)Rm. 1017, 16 West Jones [email protected]

45 Cumberland Rick Glazier (D)Rm. 1021, 16 West Jones [email protected]

46 Hoke, Robeson, Scotland G.L. Pridgen (R)Rm. 2223, 16 West Jones [email protected]

47 Robeson Charles Graham (D)Rm. 1315, 16 West Jones [email protected]

48 Hoke, Robeson, Scotland Garland E. Pierce (D)Rm. 1204, 16 West Jones [email protected]

49 Franklin, Halifax, Nash Glen Bradley (R)Rm. 536, 300 N. Salisbury [email protected]

50 Caswell, Orange Bill Faison (D)Rm. 405, 300 N. Salisbury [email protected]

51 Harnett, Lee Mike C. Stone (R)Rm. 1008, 16 West Jones [email protected]

52 Moore James L. Boles, Jr. (R)Rm. 503, 300 N. Salisbury [email protected]

53 Harnett David R. Lewis (R)Rm. 534, 300 N. Salisbury [email protected]

54 Chatham, Moore, Orange Joe Hackney (D)Rm. 612, 300 N. Salisbury [email protected]

55 Durham, Person W. A. (Winkie) Wilkins (D)Rm. 1301, 16 West Jones [email protected]

56 Orange Verla Insko (D)Rm. 603, 300 N. Salisbury [email protected]

57 Guilford Pricey Harrison (D)Rm. 1218, 16 West Jones [email protected]

58 Guilford Alma Adams (D)Rm. 604, 300 N. Salisbury [email protected]

59 Guilford Maggie Jeffus (D)Rm. 1307, 16 West Jones [email protected]

60 Guilford Marcus Brandon (D)Rm. 1209, 16 West Jones [email protected]

61 Guilford John Faircloth (R)Rm. 306A3, 300 N. Salisbury [email protected]

62 Guilford John M. Blust (R)Rm. 1229, 16 West Jones [email protected]

63 Alamance Alice L. Bordsen (D)Rm. 602, 300 N. Salisbury [email protected]

64 Alamance Dan W. Ingle (R)Rm. 530, 300 N. Salisbury [email protected]

65 Rockingham Bert Jones (U)Rm. 306A1, 300 N. Salisbury [email protected]

66 Montgomery, Richmond Ken Goodman (D)Rm. 1111, 16 West Jones [email protected]

67 Montgomery, Stanly, Union Justin P. Burr (R)Rm. 538, 300 N. Salisbury [email protected]

68 Union D. Craig Horn (R)Rm. 1010, 16 West Jones [email protected]

69 Anson, Union Frank McGuirt (D)Rm. 1015, 16 West Jones [email protected]

70 Randolph Pat B. Hurley (R)Rm. 532, 300 N. Salisbury [email protected]

71 Forsyth Larry Womble (D)Rm. 510, 300 N. Salisbury [email protected]

72 Forsyth Earline W. Parmon (D)Rm. 509, 300 N. Salisbury [email protected]

73 Davidson, Forsyth Larry R. Brown (R)Rm. 303, 300 N. Salisbury [email protected]

74 Forsyth Dale R. Folwell (R)Rm. 301F, 300 N. Salisbury [email protected]

75 Forsyth Wm. C. “Bill” McGee (R)Rm. 634, 300 N. Salisbury [email protected]

76 Rowan Fred F. Steen, II (R)Rm. 305, 300 N. Salisbury [email protected]

77 Rowan Harry Warren (R)Rm. 533, 300 N. Salisbury [email protected]

How do I Contact My Legislator?House

For additional infor-mation on finding your legislator by county or to see how they vote, please visit civitasaction.org

WHY WE GIVE PARTY AFFILIATIONS:The Legislature is managed as a partisan institution. Lawmakers segregate themselves by party in matters from daily meetings to electing leaders. They have separate and taxpayer-financed staffs. As such, gaining a full understanding of the vote of an individ-ual lawmaker requires knowing his or her partisan affiliation.

This legislative directory provides legislative phone number and legisla-tive address. Jones St. zip code is 27601. The Salisbury St. zip code is 27603.



78 Randolph Harold J. Brubaker (R)Rm. 302, 16 West Jones [email protected]

79 Davie, Iredell Julia C. Howard (R)Rm. 1106, 16 West Jones [email protected]

80 Davidson Jerry C. Dockham (R)Rm. 2204, 16 West Jones [email protected]

81 Davidson Rayne Brown (R)Rm. 638, 300 N. Salisbury [email protected]

82 Cabarrus Jeff Barnhart (R)Rm. 304, 300 N. Salisbury [email protected]

83 Cabarrus Linda P. Johnson (R)Rm. 301D, 300 N. Salisbury [email protected]

84 Avery, Caldwell, Mitchell, Yancey Phillip Frye (R)Rm. 639, 300 N. Salisbury [email protected]

85 Burke, McDowell Mitch Gillespie (R)Rm. 307B2, 300 N. Salisbury [email protected]

86 Burke Hugh Blackwell (R)Rm. 541, 300 N. Salisbury [email protected]

87 Caldwell Edgar V. Starnes (R)Rm. 419A, 300 N. Salisbury [email protected]

88 Alexander, Catawba Mark W. Hollo (R)Rm. 633, 300 N. Salisbury [email protected]

89 Catawba, Iredell Mitchell S. Setzer (R)Rm. 1206, 16 West Jones [email protected]

90 Alleghany, Surry Sarah Stevens (R)Rm. 416A, 300 N. Salisbury [email protected]

91 Rockingham, Stokes Bryan R. Holloway (R)Rm. 529, 300 N. Salisbury [email protected]

92 Iredell, Surry, Yadkin Darrell G. McCormick (R)Rm. 2119, 16 West Jones [email protected]

93 Ashe, Watauga Jonathan C. Jordan (R)Rm. 418C, 300 N. Salisbury [email protected]

94 Wilkes Shirley B. Randleman (R)Rm. 531, 300 N. Salisbury [email protected]

95 Iredell Grey Mills (R)Rm. 2221, 16 West Jones [email protected]

96 Catawba Mark K. Hilton (R)Rm. 1227, 16 West Jones [email protected]

97 Lincoln Johnathan Rhyne, Jr. (R)Rm. 2208, 16 West Jones [email protected]

98 Mecklenburg Thom Tillis (R)Rm. 2304, 16 West Jones [email protected]

99 Mecklenburg Rodney W. Moore (D)Rm. 1211, 16 West Jones [email protected]

100 Mecklenburg Tricia Ann Cotham (D)Rm. 403, 300 N. Salisbury [email protected]

101 Mecklenburg Beverly M. Earle (D)Rm. 610, 300 N. Salisbury [email protected]

102 Mecklenburg Becky Carney (D)Rm. 1221, 16 West Jones [email protected]

103 Mecklenburg William Brawley (R)Rm. 1313, 16 West Jones [email protected]

104 Mecklenburg Ruth Samuelson (R)Rm. 419B, 300 N. Salisbury [email protected]

105 Mecklenburg Ric Killian (R)Rm. 2219, 16 West Jones [email protected]

106 Mecklenburg Martha B. Alexander (D)Rm. 1213, 16 West Jones [email protected]

107 Mecklenburg Kelly M. Alexander, Jr. (D)Rm. 404, 300 N. Salisbury [email protected]

108 Gaston John A. Torbett (R)Rm. 537, 300 N. Salisbury [email protected]

109 Gaston William A. Current, Sr. (R)Rm. 418B, 300 N. Salisbury [email protected]

110 Cleveland, Gaston Kelly E. Hastings (R)Rm. 2123, 16 West Jones [email protected]

111 Cleveland Tim Moore (R)Rm. 1326, 16 West Jones [email protected]

112 Cleveland, Rutherford Mike Hager (R)Rm. 306C, 300 N. Salisbury [email protected]

113 Henderson, Polk, Transylvania W. David Guice (R)Rm. 528, 300 N. Salisbury [email protected]

114 Buncombe Susan C. Fisher (D)Rm. 504, 300 N. Salisbury [email protected]

115 Buncombe Patsy Keever (D)Rm. 1317, 16 West Jones [email protected]

116 Buncombe Tim D. Moffitt (R)Rm. 1025, 16 West Jones [email protected]

117 Henderson Chuck McGrady (R)Rm. 418A, 300 N. Salisbury [email protected]

118 Haywood, Madison, Yancey Ray Rapp (D)Rm. 1013, 16 West Jones [email protected]

119 Haywood, Jackson, Macon, Swain R. Phillip Haire (D)Rm. 609, 300 N. Salisbury [email protected]

120 Cherokee, Clay, Graham, Macon Roger West (R)Rm. 1004, 16 West Jones [email protected]

Senate1 Beaufort, Camden, Currituck, Dare, Hyde, Pasquotank, Tyrrell, Washington Stan White (D) Rm. 1121, 16 West Jones St. 919-715-8293 [email protected]

2 Carteret, Craven, Pamlico Jean R. Preston (R) Rm. 629, 300 N. Salisbury St. [email protected]

3 Edgecombe, Martin, Pitt S. Clark Jenkins (D) Rm. 621, 300 N. Salisbury St. 919-715-3040 [email protected]

4 Bertie, Chowan, Gates, Halifax, Hertford, Northampton, PerquimansW. Edward Jones (D) Rm. 518, 300 N. Salisbury St. 919-715-3032 [email protected]

5 Greene, Pitt, Wayne Louis Pate (R) Rm. 406, 300 N. Salisbury St. 919-733-5621 [email protected]

6 Jones, Onslow Harry Brown (R) Rm. 300B, 300 N. Salisbury St. 919-715-3034 [email protected]

7 Franklin, Granville, Vance, Warren Doug Berger (D) Rm. 516, 300 N. Salisbury St. 919-715-8363 [email protected]

8 Brunswick, Columbus, Pender Bill Rabon (R) Rm. 2108, 16 West Jones St. 919-733-5963 [email protected]

9 New Hanover Thom Goolsby (R) Rm. 2115, 16 West Jones St. 919-715-2525 [email protected]

10 Duplin, Lenoir, Sampson Brent Jackson (R) Rm. 525, 300 N. Salisbury St. 919-733-5705 [email protected]

11 Nash, Wilson E.S. Newton (R) Rm. 410, 300 N. Salisbury St. 919-715-3030 [email protected]

12 Johnston, Wayne David Rouzer (R) Rm. 523, 300 N. Salisbury St. [email protected]

13 Robeson, HokeMichael Walters (D) Rm. 1118, 16 West Jones [email protected]

14 Wake Daniel T. Blue, Jr. (D) Rm. 1117, 16 West Jones St. 919-733-5752 [email protected]

15 Wake Neal Hunt (R) Rm. 308, 300 N. Salisbury St. 919-733-5850 [email protected]

16 Wake Joshua H. Stein (D) Rm. 1113, 16 West Jones St. [email protected]

17 Wake Richard Y. Stevens (R) Rm. 309, 300 N. Salisbury St. 919-733-5653 [email protected]

18Chatham, Durham, Lee Robert Atwater (D) Rm. 519, 300 N. Salisbury St.919-715-3036 [email protected]

19 Bladen, Cumberland Wesley Meredith (R)Rm. 2106, 16 West Jones [email protected]

20 Durham Floyd B. McKissick, Jr. (D) Rm. 520, 300 N. Salisbury St. 919-733-4599 [email protected]

21 Cumberland Eric Mansfield (R) Rm. 1119, 16 West Jones St. 919-733-9349 [email protected]

22 Harnett, Moore Harris Blake (R) Rm. 408, 300 N. Salisbury St. 919-733-4809 [email protected]

23 Orange, Person Eleanor Kinnaird (D) Rm. 628, 300 N. Salisbury St. 919-733-5804 [email protected]

24 Alamance, Caswell Rick Gunn (R) Rm. 312, 300 N. Salisbury St. 919-301-1446 [email protected]

25 Anson, Richmond, Scotland, Stanly William R. Purcell (D) Rm. 517, 300 N. Salisbury St. 919-733-5953 [email protected]

26 Guilford, Rockingham Philip Edward Berger (R) Rm. 2008, 16 West Jones St. 919-733-5708 [email protected]

27 Guilford Don Vaughan (D) Rm. 515, 300 N. Salisbury St. [email protected] 28 Guilford Gladys A. Robinson (D) Rm. 1120, 16 West Jones St. 919-715-3042 [email protected]

29 Montgomery, Randolph Jerry W. Tillman (R) Rm. 627, 300 N. Salisbury St. 919-733-5870 [email protected]

30 Alleghany, Stokes, Surry, Yadkin Don W. East (R) Rm. 522, 300 N. Salisbury St. 919-733-5743 [email protected]

31 Forsyth Peter S. Brunstetter (R) Rm. 2022, 16 West Jones St. 919-733-7850 [email protected]

32 Forsyth Linda Garrou (D) Rm. 620, 300 N. Salisbury St. 919-733-5620 [email protected]

33 Davidson, Guilford Stan Bingham (R) Rm. 2117, 16 West Jones St. 919-733-5665 [email protected]

34 Davie, Rowan Andrew C. Brock (R) Rm. 623, 300 N. Salisbury St. 919-715-0690 [email protected]

35 Mecklenburg, Union Tommy Tucker (R) Rm. 311, 300 N. Salisbury St. 919-733-7659 [email protected]

36 Cabarrus, Iredell Fletcher L. Hartsell, Jr. (R) Rm. 300C, 300 N. Salisbury St. 919-733-7223 [email protected]

37 Mecklenburg Daniel G. Clodfelter (D) Rm. 526, 300 N. Salisbury St. 919-715-8331 [email protected]

38 Mecklenburg Charlie Smith Dannelly (D) Rm. 1127, 16 West Jones St. 919-733-5955 [email protected]

39 Mecklenburg Bob Rucho (R) Rm. 300A, 300 N. Salisbury St. 919-733-5655 [email protected]

40 Mecklenburg Malcolm Graham (D) Rm. 622, 300 N. Salisbury St. 919-733-5650 [email protected]

41 Gaston, Iredell, Lincoln James Forrester (R) Rm. 2108, 16 West Jones St. 919-715-3050 [email protected]

42 Catawba, Iredell Austin M. Allran (R) Rm. 625, 300 N. Salisbury St. 919-733-5876 [email protected]

43 Gaston Kathy Harrington (R) Rm. 2113, 16 West Jones St. 919-733-5734 [email protected]

44 Burke, Caldwell Warren Daniel (R) Rm. 411, 300 N. Salisbury St. 919-715-7823 [email protected]

45 Alexander, Ashe, Watauga, Wilkes Dan Soucek (R) Rm. 310, 300 N. Salisbury St. 919-733-5742 [email protected]

46 Cleveland, Rutherford Debbie A. Clary (R) Rm. 314, 300 N. Salisbury St. 919-715-3038 [email protected]

47 Avery, Haywood, Madison, McDowell, Mitchell, Yancey Ralph Hise (R) Rm. 1026, 16 West Jones St. 919-733-3460 [email protected]

48 Buncombe, Henderson, Polk Tom M. Apodaca (R) Rm. 2010, 16 West Jones St. 919-733-5745 [email protected]

49 Buncombe Martin L. Nesbitt, Jr. (D) Rm. 1129, 16 West Jones St. 919-715-3001 [email protected]

50 Cherokee, Clay, Graham, Haywood, Jackson, Macon, Swain, Transylvania Jim Davis (R) Rm. 2111, 16 West Jones St. 919-733-5875 [email protected]

This legislative directory provides legislative phone number and legisla-tive address. Jones St. zip code is 27601. The Salisbury St. zip code is 27603.

For additional infor-mation on finding your legislator by county or to see how they vote, please visit civitasaction.org


CAPITOL CONNECTIONCivitas12

Teachers rallied with alliance North Carolina Association Educators (NCAE) at a recent rally, where the battle cry was to fully fund public education. NCAE ex-ecutives don’t have the same fear of not being funded, considering they have received pay raises for their advocacy work. Photo: Raleigh News & Observer

• S C A N D A L •

NCAE Rally Tells One Story - Executive Compensation and Political Contributions Tell Another

On Tuesday, May 3, the North Carolina Association of Educators (NCAE) – the largest teachers associ-ation in the state – held a rally across from the General Assembly to pro-test the House’s $19 billion budget plan. The House plan fully funds all teaching positions but also calls for $760 million in budget reductions for K- 12 public schools to help meet the state’s $2.4 billion budget deficit.

Gov. Bev Perdue and NAACP President William Barber were among the speakers who urged teach-ers to fight budget cuts and encour-aged them to tell their lawmakers to maintain current spending levels for public schools funding.

One thing NCAE members didn’t hear about at the rally was compensation increases for NCAE executives. An analysis of federal tax forms by the Civitas Institute reveals NCAE executive compensation in-creased 24 percent between 2006 and 2009. Over the same time pe-riod, average teacher compensation in North Carolina increased 12 per-cent.

When asked to comment on findings in the Civitas report, Tom

Herbert, NCAE business manager, said the numbers were accurate but misleading. Herbert explained, “As the stock market went down in 2008-09, we were required to pay in addi-tional monies to make up the differ-ence in what the stock market took away from our [employees].”

Huh? The numbers are simply higher

because NCAE executives evidently had guaranteed rates of return on their retirement programs. Additional pay-ments were needed to compensate for the declines in the value of the stock market. The additional compensation payouts reflect the true costs of gold-plated retirement programs available to NCAE executives, but not avail-able to rank-and-file teachers.

While it’s not surprising to learn NCAE executives have higher aver-age total compensation, I wonder if teachers are happy to know the aver-age total increase in compensation for NCAE executives is twice the com-pensation increase for the average North Carolina teacher during the same period. In 2009, average total compensation for the eight highest-paid NCAE executives was a whop-ping $176,796.

BY BOB LUEBKE

Pass The Torch Donate⃤ My check made payable to The Civitas Institute is enclosed.⃤ Please charge my: ⃤ American Express ⃤ Master Card ⃤ Discover ⃤ Visa

Name___________________________________________________________

Address _________________________________________________________

City ____________________________ State _______ Zip ______________

Phone _________________________ Email ___________________________

Card No. ⃤⃤⃤⃤ ⃤⃤⃤⃤ ⃤⃤⃤⃤ ⃤⃤⃤⃤

Amount: $____________ Expiration: ___ ___ / ___ ___ CVV ___________

Signature: ________________________________________________________

All contributions are tax deductible

If you prefer to make your contribution over the phone, please call Marianne Suarez at (919) 834-2099.

$5 = 20 new readers $25 = 100 new readers $100 = 400 new readers $1000 = 4000 new readers

Mail to: Civitas Institute 100 S. Harrington St. Raleigh, NC 27603

Donate online atwww.nccivitas.org/donate

It’s curious, while rally speakers bemoaned declining average teacher salaries, falling state support for pub-lic education and the lack of raises for teachers, it appears NCAE executives are immune rom fallout from the re-cession. In 2009, NCAE took in $8.8 million in membership dues and paid out $7.9 million in salaries compen-sation and employee benefits.

While teacher salaries have re-mained flat, membership dues to NCAE have been rising. Last year NCAE members paid an average of $370 in annual dues. This year while schools are struggling to save teacher jobs, NCAE membership dues have increased to $415. That includes $237 for NCAE and $178 for the Na-tional Education Association (NEA) dues. Since NCAE is an NEA affili-ate, members are required to pay dues to both organizations. In some coun-ties, NCAE members are asked to support county NCAE chapters. For example NCAE members in Wake County will pay $86 in dues for the

local, county chapter. I wonder if teachers are happy

watching NCAE executives receive lavish compensation packages while they face budget reductions at their schools, a third year with no salary increase and further declines in their retirement accounts? w

To read more about NCAE, visit www.nccivitas.org/2011/ncae-looking-out-for-children-members-or-itself/

The Civitas Institute offers training in investigative journalism and expos-ing government corruption. We hold monthly meetings for those who want to learn more and connect with others to combat public corruption. For more in-formation contact Bob Luebke at 919-834-2099, Ext. 135.

Scandal is a regular column in Capitol Connection that will explore public corruption in NC Government. Have a local corruption story? Email us at : [email protected]. or call 919-834-2099.

Documents

Civitas Capitol Connection