Threat of federal cuts looms large as NC legislators start budget meetings
The General Assembly's Joint Health and Human Services Appropriations Committee begins its budget review on Feb. 25, 2025. (Photo: Lynn Bonner)
North Carolina legislators began public budget discussions Tuesday in the shadow of a giant question mark. How will North Carolina respond to any federal budget cuts?
Republicans in the U.S. House have prepared a budget blueprint that would mean deep cuts to Medicaid, the government health insurance program for people with low incomes.
'In the next 60 days, we'll know what's going to happen, and it could change everything,' said state Sen. Jim Burgin (R-Harnett), a chairman of the Senate Health and Human Services budget committee.
Congressional Republicans are also considering reductions in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or food stamps, and changes to a policy on school meals that would lead to cuts to breakfast and lunch programs, with fewer schools able to offer all students in high-poverty areas meals at no charge.
The U.S. House and Senate must agree on a budget before it goes to President Donald Trump. That agreement isn't expected until April or May at the earliest. North Carolina's budget year ends on June 30. Legislative budget committees are starting to dig into the details of state agency spending this week.
The federal cuts to safety net programs would help pay for the tax cuts and immigration plans that top President Donald Trump's domestic agenda.
More than a third of the money North Carolina spends each year comes from the federal government. In fiscal year 2023, 37.5% of the money the state spent was federal money, according to a National Association of State Budget Officers report.
Much of that federal money flows to the state Department of Health and Human Services, which houses the Medicaid program.
The reliance on federal funds for health was reinforced Tuesday at the legislative committee that began to review the state DHHS budget.
The agency's budget this year is nearly $40.7 billion, with Medicaid accounting for nearly $32.8 billion of that. About $6.2 billion of North Carolina's Medicaid costs are paid from state coffers. The federal government picks up most of the rest.
Burgin said in an interview he hopes Congress approaches Medicaid cuts with a scalpel rather than a meat cleaver.
DHHS touches everybody in the state all the time, he said, and they don't even realize it. 'I want North Carolina to be the healthiest state in the country and I want us to control our costs while we do it.'
Rep. Allen Buansi (D-Orange), a member of the House health budget committee, said he is 'gravely concerned,' about potential federal cuts.
'We depend a lot on our federal government when it comes to health and human services,' he said.
Republicans in the U.S. House have discussed reducing federal support for adults who have insurance coverage due to Medicaid expansion. The federal government picks up 90% of the cost of people covered under Medicaid expansion. In North Carolina, the state doesn't cover any of the costs.
North Carolina is one of nine states that has a statutory trigger that ends Medicaid expansion if the federal government stops paying 90%. More than 600,000 North Carolinians enrolled in expanded Medicaid in the year after the state enacted it in December 2023.
U.S. House Republicans are also considering changing Medicaid so that it pays a set amount per person rather than paying for a percentage of allowable costs.
Sen. Ralph Hise (R-Mitchell), a chairman of the Senate budget committee, said he didn't see a point in speculating when the U.S. House and Senate are far from an agreement on cuts.
'I don't see a lot of value in guessing,' he said.
Aside from the federal budget debate, what North Carolina does know is that the overall percentage of Medicaid costs the federal government will pick up is expected to drop over the next two years, Hise said.
The federal government calculates its Medicaid support for states based on average per capita income relative to other states.
North Carolina has been doing well, so the federal reimbursement percentage has been dropping, and will continue to drop over the next two years, said Hise. Preliminary estimates put the loss at $1.3 billion over two years, he said.
Helene road repair costs
Members of the Joint Appropriations Committee on Transportation heard the sobering news that the projected cost to repair all the roads and bridges damaged by Hurricane Helene will be just shy of $5 billion.
And while more than $432 million has been spent to date on repairs, that represents less than 9% of the cost estimates, with thousands of rebuild projects remaining. Department of Transportation engineers also cautioned lawmakers that redirecting dollars from the deferred maintenance fund to address Helene damage would leave fewer dollars to improve road conditions in other regions of the state.
NC Newsline's Clayton Henkel contributed to this report.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
25 minutes ago
- Yahoo
France Moves to Curb ‘Ultra-fast' Fashion With Bill Targeting Shein and Temu
PARIS — As major brands scale back their sustainability initiatives, France is pressing ahead with legislation aimed at reining in 'ultra-fast fashion' platforms such as Shein and Temu, known for their extremely low-cost clothing. The bill, introduced by Anne-Cécile Violland, a member of parliament from the Horizons party, passed the Senate one year after clearing the lower house of the French Assembly. More from WWD Inditex Sales Slow as Economic Headwinds Hit the High Street Rebag Expands Access to Pre-loved Luxury Goods With New Amazon Collaboration Designer Vincent Van Duysen Opens Antwerp Home for Zara Home+ 4th Collection The unusually long gap between votes led to some watering down of the original provisions, exempting traditional fast-fashion players such as H&M, Primark, and Inditex-owned Zara. 'It's a relief that it moved forward, but there has been a shift in the goal of the legislation that it is now specifically targeting what is called 'ultra-fast fashion,'' said Pierre Condamine, spokesperson for the Anti Fast Fashion Coalition, an umbrella group of 11 environmental organizations in France. Earlier drafts had adopted a broader definition of fast fashion that included Europe-based brands. 'There is sort of a shift in what was supposed to be an environmental legislation, with the objective to shift the whole sector towards sustainable practices, while now it's sort of becoming a protectionist text,' he told WWD. The revised bill targets ultra-fast fashion directly, proposing a tax on small parcels shipped from outside the EU ranging from 2 to 4 euros per package. The fee is intended to slow the influx of packages from Chinese platforms to France, in a move reminiscent of the U.S. ending its de minimis exemption. Shein and Temu together shipped 800 million packages to France in 2024 — more than half of all parcels sent to the country. The French government will first notify the European Commission, as several measures, including a total advertising ban on ultra-fast-fashion platforms, require approval at the EU level. This process could take up to three months before the bill goes to the Assembly and Senate joint committee for resolution, likely in the fall in late September or October. Several key provisions may face scrutiny in Brussels, including the parcel fee, which could conflict with the European Commission's plan for a bloc-wide fee by 2028, and the proposed national advertising ban. Although Shein is registered in Singapore, its European headquarters in Ireland could present a legal loophole. As it stands, the bill mandates eco-contributions from fashion companies based on a 'bonus-malus' system — rewarding sustainable practices and penalizing environmental harm. Penalties could rise to 10 euros per item by 2030, though the methodology for valuing items has yet to be defined. The bill would also eliminate tax advantages for 'donating' unsold stock by ultra-fast-fashion brands, which are not permitted to destroy unsold items under an anti-waste law passed in 2020. A critical element of the bill is its specific definition of 'ultra-fast' or 'ultra-express' fashion. This distinction leaves out more traditional fast-fashion companies that have a retail presence like H&M, Primark and Zara. By differentiating between ultra-fast platforms and fast-fashion brands with physical retail locations, the legislation potentially creates a loophole for companies headquartered in Europe — Sweden, Ireland and Spain respectively — even though their production relies heavily on low-wage countries like China, India and Bangladesh via subcontractors and diffuse supply chains. The original bill passed by the Assembly featured the broader definition, but companies lobbied intensively over the past year for the narrower language, arguing that they contribute to local employment. Senator Sylvie Valente Le Hir of Les Républicains, who ushered the bill through the Senate, highlighted its targeted approach: 'We have drawn a clear line between those we want to regulate — ultra-express fashion — and those we want to preserve, accessible but rooted fashion, which employs in France, which structures our territories, which creates links and supports a local economic fabric,' she said. The industry group La Fédération Française du Prêt à Porter Féminin praised the bill as a 'step forward' in tackling ultra-fast fashion. 'It formalizes the long-standing collective commitment of many stakeholders to defend a fashion industry that respects workers, consumers, citizens, French businesses, and the planet,' the organization said in a statement. However, Condamine noted that while large global fast-fashion retailers remain profitable – Zara's parent company Inditex reported sales were up 4.2 percent in constant-currency in the first quarter on Wednesday — French high street brands like Camaieu and NafNaf have entered administration, and independent stores continue to shutter. 'The economic crisis in the clothing industry in France, it started way before Shein,' Condamine said. 'It started when fast fashion — Zara, H&M, Primark — arrived. Now they are saying if they're targeted, it will be a catastrophe [for jobs]. But they're doing great economically, and they're part of the problem.' Some lawmakers described the bill as a 'strong first signal' and indicated that fast fashion as a whole — including the European players with physical presence — could face future regulation due to unsustainable business practices. On the other hand, critics — chiefly Shein — have said the legislation punishes cost-conscious consumers and lower-income households. The company, which markets itself under the slogan 'Fashion is a right, not a privilege,' has staged events in French cities like Béziers. On Sunday, its director of government relations, Fabrice Layer, held a presentation in front of the southeastern town's city hall to rally public support for the company. 'We ultimately find ourselves with a law that is not only anti-Shein, but anti-Shein customer,' Quentin Ruffat, Shein's spokesperson in France, told AFP. 'This law, if passed, will directly penalize our customers' wallets and drastically reduce their purchasing power.' The company has also accused France's fashion establishment of protecting legacy brands and says it will continue lobbying to amend the bill further. Shein representatives did not respond to requests for comment. New research from l'Institut Français de la Mode (IFM) shows that in the first quarter of 2025, Amazon, Shein and Temu together accounted for 24 percent of online apparel sales by value, representing 7 percent of total apparel consumption across all channels. Online sales made up 29.4 percent of apparel purchases by value, including the online stores of traditional retailers. Best of WWD Walmart Calls California Waste Dumping Lawsuit 'Unjustified' Year in Review: Sustainability's Biggest Controversies of 2021 Year in Review: Sustainability's New Strides
Yahoo
26 minutes ago
- Yahoo
GOP Senator Says Trump's Military Parade Reminds Him Of North Korea
WASHINGTON ― President Donald Trump's upcoming military parade featuring dozens of tanks and other armed vehicles in the nation's capital this week isn't sitting well with some members of his party on Capitol Hill. Asked about the June 14 event, which will cost taxpayers up to $45 million and will commemorate the Army's 250th anniversary, Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) expressed concerns about its cost and the imagery typically associated with authoritarian regimes in the former Soviet Union and North Korea. 'I love parades but I'm not really excited about $40 million for a parade,' Paul told HuffPost. 'I don't really think the symbolism of tanks and missiles is really what we're all about.' 'If you ask me about a military parade, all the images that come to mind, the first images, are of the Soviet Union and North Korea,' he added. Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.) also said he would spend the money on other things. 'The United States of America is the most powerful country in all of human history,' Kennedy told Fox News. 'We're a lion, and a lion doesn't have to tell you it's a lion. Everybody else in the jungle knows, and we're a lion. I would save the money, but if the president wants to have a parade, he's the President, and I'm not.' The Saturday parade — which happens to fall on the president's birthday ― will feature a massive amount of military equipment and thousands of soldiers in Washington, D.C. It comes amid nationwide protests against Trump's immigration crackdowns and his decision to deploy military troops to help quell unrest in Los Angeles. Trump on Tuesday threatened anyone planning to protest the parade, even though U.S. citizens have a constitutional right to peacefully assemble. 'If there's any protest that wants to come out, they will be met with very big force, by the way. And for those people that want to protest, they're gonna be met with very big force,' the president said from the Oval Office. Millions of people are expected to take part in 'No Kings' protests in more than 1,500 cities across the country on Saturday, organizers of the demonstrations have said. The effort is focused on pushing back against Trump's attacks on the rule of law. However, no 'No Kings' protests are planned for Washington, D.C., where the parade is being held. 'In America, we don't do kings,' reads a website for the demonstrations. 'They've defied our courts, deported Americans, disappeared people off the streets, attacked our civil rights, and slashed our services. The corruption has gone too. far.'
Yahoo
26 minutes ago
- Yahoo
History Shows the Danger of Trump's Health Policies
U.S. President Donald Trump and Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. attend an event in the East Room of the White House on May 22, 2025 in Washington, DC. Credit - Chip Somodevilla—Getty Images On May 11, 2023, President Joseph Biden ended the COVID-19 public health emergency, calling an finish to the pandemic. By the end of 2023, COVID-19 claimed the lives of over 20 million people around the world. But through international cooperation and evidence-based science, vaccines were developed and the world moved on. Indeed, perhaps the biggest success of the period was the quick production of a COVID-19 vaccine. The research behind the mRNA vaccine had been ongoing since the 1970s, but the emergency of the pandemic and international sharing of knowledge helped bring the vaccine to fruition. Today, the COVID-19 vaccine has been credited with saving 2.4 million lives around the world. But now, the U.S. is choosing competition over cooperation. With President Donald Trump's day one executive order to leave the World Health Organization (WHO)—blaming their COVID-19 response—and the shuttering of USAID, the country is taking steps towards further dividing health efforts across the globe. Here in the U.S., a sudden end to $11.4 billion of covid-related grants is stifling national pandemic preparedness efforts on the local and state levels. And most recently, Health and Human Services Secretary RFK Jr. purged experts from the CDC Advisory Committee, putting lives at risk. Historical lessons demonstrate the need for global health infrastructure that works together, shares knowledge, and remembers that pathogens do not stop at borders. White House's Pandemic Office, Busy With Bird Flu, May Shrink Under Trump One of the greatest global health achievements of all time—smallpox eradication—provides a perfect example of what can be done with independent scientific research and international cooperation. During the Cold War between the U.S. and USSR, decades of tension brought the world to the brink of nuclear war. Yet, incredibly, the nations managed to find common ground to support the efforts of smallpox eradication. Indeed, they understood the strategic benefits that came from letting public health practitioners and scientists work outside of political divides. The WHO was founded after World War II in 1948. Its formation marked a move from international health, that focused on nations, to global health, that would serve humanity first. The WHO's first eradication effort was the failed, U.S.-backed, Malaria Eradication Program from 1955 to 1969. The Smallpox Eradication Program, with intensive efforts beginning in 1967, provided a chance for redemption for the U.S. and WHO. For the United States, investing in disease eradication and poverty helped to mitigate growing backlash against the Vietnam War. In June of 1964, President Lyndon B. Johnson stated, 'I propose to dedicate this year to finding new techniques for making man's knowledge serve man's welfare.' He called for 1965—the same year he ordered ground troops to Vietnam to stop the spread of communism —to be a year of international cooperation that could bypass the politics of the Cold War. Previously, the USSR did not participate in the U.S. and WHO's first, failed global eradication plan for malaria. But upon rejoining the WHO in 1956, it was the Soviets who made the first call and investment into global eradication of smallpox in 1958. The WHO functioning as a mediator was crucial to allowing the USSR and the U.S. to work together. It allowed both nations to avoid giving credit to each other; rather success went to science itself. President Johnson called this 'a turning point' away from 'man against man' towards 'man against nature.' The limited role of politicians in the program proved to be key to its success. Scientists made decisions and worked together—no matter what country they came from—by focusing on disease and vaccination, not international tensions. The Soviet-initiated program was lead by Donald A. Henderson, a U.S. epidemiologist, who worked alongside the Russians until the last case of smallpox occurred in Somalia on October 26, 1977. During the 20th century, smallpox was responsible for an estimated 300 to 500 million deaths. Smallpox was officially declared eradicated by the WHO in October 1980, and is today still the only human disease to achieve this distinction. Less than a year after the declaration of smallpox eradication, the emergence of another pandemic, the HIV/AIDS crisis, reinforced the importance of science-first cooperation over politically-driven decision making. In June 1981, the first cases of a new unknown disease were reported in the CDC's Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report. In short order, gay men were stigmatized and blamed in what would become one of the biggest public health disasters of all time. It took years of grassroots science-based activism to move beyond HIV/AIDS victim-blaming and find medical solutions. The Poster Child for AIDS Obscured as Much About the Crisis as He Revealed Too often, governments across the globe placed blame on the gay community for their 'sins' and did not provide needed support, leaving the sick to suffer and die. The pharmaceutical companies profited from the limited medications they had available and did not pursue sufficient development. The FDA process for new drugs was scheduled to take nine years, at a time when life expectancy after receiving an HIV/AIDS diagnosis was one year. These issues sparked activism, spawning the AIDS Coalition to Unleash Power (ACT UP) in 1987. ACT UP organizers took science into their own hands and began educating themselves. Members began reading scientific journals religiously, learning the chemistry and epidemiology of drug manufacturing and clinical trials. Members learned how to translate these dense scientific messages to educate the community members on what was—and what was not—being done to help. Because of this work, the FDA changed policies to allow for new treatments to be tested at accelerated rates in times of emergency. ACT UP was able to shift the cultural blame showing that the issue was a result of politics getting in the way of scientific advancements. By 1990, ACT UP influenced the largest federal HIV program to pass Congress, the Ryan White CARE Act. This program was a vital precursor to the 2003 PEPFAR (The U.S. President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief) global initiative. Both of these histories offer a powerful lesson: global health is national health, and national health is local health. With the recent funding cuts from the U.S. government, the future of global health is going in an unknown direction. And yet, the occurrence of pandemics is expected to increase in frequency due to climate change, mass migration, urbanization, and ecosystem destruction. It has been estimated that there is about a 25% chance we will have another COVID-sized pandemic within the next 10 years. No matter how secure the world makes borders, history shows that it can not protect us from disease if we do not have a strong, interconnected public health infrastructure. Luke Jorgensen is a Master of Public Health student at Purdue University where his epidemiology research examines human migration and infectious disease. Made by History takes readers beyond the headlines with articles written and edited by professional historians. Learn more about Made by History at TIME here. Opinions expressed do not necessarily reflect the views of TIME editors. Write to Made by History at madebyhistory@