Democrats cross aisle to back GOP budget
A majority of North Carolina House Democrats crossed the aisle to vote for a GOP-written state budget this week, a surprisingly bipartisan show of support that also sets up a fight within the Republican Party over taxes.
As the House took a break after hours of debate, Democratic Leader Robert Reives told reporters that he would support members of his caucus however they were to vote on the bill. And hours later, he voted with Republicans for the budget, as did 26 other members of his party.
'The most important point that I think you've got to understand about this budget that's going to be a tough decision for everybody sitting in that House chamber is the horrible fiscal condition that we're in right now as a state,' Reives said.
The budget bill written by House Republicans keeps the upcoming reduction in North Carolina's individual income tax rate but requires a sunnier state budget picture before future tax cuts kick in, a move that the Senate opposes and could be the key rift between the House and Senate as they work next to negotiate a final budget to send to the governor.
Democratic Gov. Josh Stein visited the Legislative Building and talked with lawmakers on Wednesday before announcing that the House budget has several things in it that he likes.
'The House's proposed budget isn't perfect. But I am pleased that the House raises teacher pay to make North Carolina's starting teacher salaries the second-highest in the Southeast and rewards our state employees with a raise. The House budget also makes important investments in public safety, child care, and workforce training,' Stein said in an emailed statement.
Reives told reporters before the vote that the budget isn't one he would have written or wants to support.
'But I also understand that we've got a duty to govern, and at some point, the hard decision that's going to have to be made by everybody, whenever it is, is governing,' he said.
Just ahead of the last round of debate before the vote, Reives and top Republicans left the chamber together, and returned to the floor talking and smiling.
Republicans have control of the House but are one vote short of a veto-proof supermajority.
Democratic Rep. Terry Brown Jr. praised parts of the Republicans' budget during the debate, saying that it listens to Democrats and the people of North Carolina on restoring master's degree pay for teachers and restoring the state income tax holiday. He also criticized the budget for not doing enough for state employees. Brown, who represents Mecklenburg County, called the bill 'a good start.'
The House would give higher raises than both the Senate's proposal and Stein's pitch, with 2.5% across-the-board salary boosts for all state employees in the coming year.
The bill also cuts thousands of state employee jobs, most of which are vacant. Of the 3,000 state employee positions to be cut, about 2,000 of them come as part of a demand that state agencies and the UNC System cut 20% of their vacant positions. Money saved from those cuts would go to the agencies to be used at their discretion for higher raises for their employees.
The budget would increase starting teacher pay to $48,000 in the coming year and $50,000 the following year, which would make it the highest in the Southeast.
The House budget keeps the planned individual income tax rate reduction planned for 2026, cutting it to 3.99% from 4.25%, but would set new levels for the future state tax collections that 'trigger' additional tax cuts. Future triggers are harder to meet than the Senate's plan.
Carolina Partnership for Reform, a political group that generally promotes ideas in line with Republican Senate leader Phil Berger, called the House Republicans' plan a 'tax hike' in an email Tuesday.
Budget documents say that the change 'increases net General Fund revenue' by keeping the projected tax rate at 3.99% in the 2027 tax year, rather than dropping the rate further as would happen under existing triggers.
'Having no budget deal is a better outcome than this one,' Carolina Partnership for Reform wrote in the email to its distribution list.
But House Republicans felt differently. Every one of them voted for the budget plan.
House Rules Chair John Bell told The News & Observer on Wednesday that 'just because we didn't aggressively lower taxes, as their budget did, doesn't mean we raised taxes.'
He also said that 'petty shots' make negotiations between Republicans in both chambers 'that much harder.'
House Republicans shut down several Democratic amendments during hours of debate on Wednesday. One of them would have given the Office of State Human Resources more authority in choosing job cuts.
Rep. Donny Lambeth of Forsyth County, one of the top House Republican budget writers, said that the amendment would take away the flexibility offered to state agencies to choose which vacant jobs to cut.
Distributed by Tribune Content Agency.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
News24
33 minutes ago
- News24
Harvard scores a temporary victory in battle against Trump administration ‘vendetta'
A court on Thursday put a temporary stay on Donald Trump's latest effort to stop foreign students from enrolling at Harvard, as the US president's battle with one of the world's most prestigious universities intensified. A proclamation issued by the White House late Wednesday sought to bar most new international students at Harvard from entering the country, and said existing foreign enrollees risked having their visas terminated. 'Harvard's conduct has rendered it an unsuitable destination for foreign students and researchers,' the order said. Harvard quickly amended an existing complaint filed in federal court, saying: 'This is not the Administration's first attempt to sever Harvard from its international students.' '(It) is part of a concerted and escalating campaign of retaliation by the government in clear retribution for Harvard's exercising its First Amendment rights to reject the government's demands to control Harvard's governance, curriculum, and the 'ideology' of its faculty and students.' READ | 'Such a disgrace': Outrage as Trump ramps up attacks on Harvard, Columbia US District Judge Allison Burroughs on Thursday ruled the government cannot enforce Trump's proclamation. Harvard had showed, she said, that without a temporary restraining order, it risked sustaining 'immediate and irreparable injury before there is an opportunity to hear from all parties'. The same judge had already blocked Trump's earlier effort to bar international students from enrolling at the storied university. The government already cut around $3.2 billion of federal grants and contracts benefiting Harvard and pledged to exclude the Cambridge, Massachusetts, institution from any future federal funding. Harvard has been at the forefront of Trump's campaign against top universities after it defied his calls to submit to oversight of its curriculum, staffing, student recruitment and 'viewpoint diversity'. Trump has also singled out international students at Harvard, who accounted for 27% of total enrolment in the 2024-2025 academic year and are a major source of income. In its filing, Harvard acknowledged that Trump had the authority to bar an entire class of aliens if it was deemed to be in the public interest, but stressed that was not the case in this action. The president's actions thus are not undertaken to protect the 'interests of the United States' but instead to pursue a government vendetta against Harvard. Harvard filing Since returning to office Trump has targeted elite US universities which he and his allies accuse of being hotbeds of antisemitism, liberal bias and 'woke' ideology. Trump's education secretary also threatened on Wednesday to strip Columbia University of its accreditation. The Republican has targeted the New York Ivy League institution for allegedly ignoring harassment of Jewish students, throwing all of its federal funding into doubt. Unlike Harvard, several top institutions - including Columbia - have already bowed to far-reaching demands from the Trump administration.
CNN
an hour ago
- CNN
A West Virginia prosecutor is warning women that a miscarriage could lead to criminal charges
Amid a constantly changing reproductive landscape, one West Virginia prosecutor is warning people who have miscarriages in his state that they could get in trouble with the law. Raleigh County Prosecuting Attorney Tom Truman says that although he personally wouldn't prosecute someone for a miscarriage, he made the suggestion out of an abundance of caution after hearing from other prosecutors. Truman even suggests people might want to let local law enforcement know if they've have a miscarriage. Several reproductive law experts say people around the country have, indeed, faced charges related to miscarriages — but they still wouldn't recommend reaching out to law enforcement. Truman says the idea first came up during a chat with other West Virginia prosecutors at a conference several years ago, and it's been been an ongoing conversation since. The initial conversation was theoretical, since at the time, women in the US still had the constitutional right to an abortion under Roe v. Wade. But some of the prosecutors believed they could charge a person using state laws related to the disposal of human remains. 'I thought these guys were just chewing on a Dreamsicle,' Truman said. But, he added, West Virginia's legal statutes include definitions that are 'pretty broad-ranging.' The way some prosecutors may interpret the law means people who miscarry could face criminal charges, including felonies, he said. 'It's a different world now, and there's a lot of discretion that prosecutors have, and some of them have agendas where they would like to make you an example,' Truman told CNN. 'What's changed is, Roe isn't there anymore, and so that may embolden prosecutors in some cases,' he said. 'I'm just trying to say, 'be careful.' ' Early pregnancy loss is common, according to the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, It happens in about 10 of 100 known pregnancies, often because the embryo isn't developing properly. And some reproductive law experts say it's probably not a good idea to call the police when it happens. 'It's always a mistake to invite law enforcement into your reproductive life,' said Kim Mutcherson, a professor of law at Rutgers Law School who specializes in reproductive justice. Calling police could prompt an unwanted investigation, she says. 'If they then decide, 'no, it actually wasn't a miscarriage, this was somebody who took pills,' or whatever sort of thing that they want to conjure up, then all of a sudden it goes from 'here's this poor woman who had a miscarriage' to 'here's a person who we're going to start to prosecute,' ' Mutcherson said. 'I understand the idea that caution is better than being caught up in something that you weren't anticipating, but it is difficult for me to imagine any circumstance in which I would think it was safe for someone who miscarried to call the police,' she added. Abortion is illegal in West Virginia, but there are exceptions in the case of a medical emergency or a nonviable pregnancy, or if the pregnancy is the result of rape or incest. Kulsoom Ijaz, senior policy counsel with Pregnancy Justice, a nonprofit focused on the civil and human rights of pregnant people, said she doesn't believe there is anything in West Virginia law that criminalizes miscarriage. 'I think the law is pretty clear,' she said. 'There's nothing in the law that says someone can be charged with a crime in connection to their pregnancy loss or their conduct during pregnancy, or for how they respond to that pregnancy loss or miscarriage or stillbirth.' The fractured landscape of reproductive rights that came about in the wake of the Dobbs decision, the US Supreme Court ruling that revoked the federal right to an abortion, has increased the risk that a pregnant person can face criminal prosecution for a variety of reasons, not just a miscarriage, according to a report from Ijaz's organization. Between June 2022 – when Dobbs was handed down – and June 2023, there were more than 200 cases in the US in which a pregnant person faced criminal charges for conduct associated with pregnancy, pregnancy loss or birth, according to Pregnancy Justice. The number is most likely an undercount, Ijaz said. In West Virginia, there were at least three cases related to pregnancy prosecutions. In one, the state's Supreme Court found that the state could not levy criminal child abuse charges against someone for their prenatal conduct, which included substance use during pregnancy. Even with the strict abortion ban in place, Ijaz said, 'there are still protections for pregnant people.' In states like Alabama that have fetal personhood laws that give fertilized eggs, embryos and a fetus the 'same rights as you and I,' Ijaz said, it's a little different. 'We've seen people get prosecuted and face decades of incarceration for substance use during pregnancy, because that fetus that they're carrying is seen as a child,' she said. Last year in Ohio, a woman who had a miscarriage at home was charged with a felony on the advice of the Warren City Prosecutor's Office, but a grand jury dismissed the case. Ijaz said that she doesn't think there is an appetite for these kind of cases among the public but that no matter where someone lives, inviting the law into their life right after a miscarriage is ill-advised. The legal landscape for reproductive justice 'seems to almost be changing on a daily basis' – and generally not in favorable ways for pregnant people, said Brittany Fonteno, CEO of the National Abortion Federation, a professional association for abortion providers. 'The laws, the rhetoric, the culture in which we are living in within the US has become so incredibly hostile to people who experience pregnancy,' she said. 'I think that the intersection of health care and criminalization is an incredibly dangerous path,' Fonteno added. 'As a country, we should be supporting people and their ability to access the health care that they need, rather than conducting intrusive and traumatic investigations into their reproductive lives.' Fonteno recommends that people who experience pregnancy loss reach out to a qualified medical professional rather than law enforcement. 'While we are living in a very different country than we were pre-Dobbs, I believe still that this is an individual experience and a health care decision,' she said. 'Most providers believe that as well.' Mutcherson also says that the reproductive justice landscape in the US is 'scary' for people who are pregnant, who want to get pregnant or who have bad pregnancy outcomes. If there's any silver lining to the discussion about criminalizing miscarriage, she said, it's that it's good for people to know that such things can happen. 'Women have been criminalized for their pregnancies for decades, frankly, so to the extent that there is a wider and broader conversation about what it means to treat an embryo or a fetus as a person, and the ways in which that diminishes the personhood of somebody who was pregnant, that is in fact a valuable thing, right?' Mutcherson said. 'Maybe this is actually going to bring us to a better space.'
Washington Post
an hour ago
- Washington Post
American Vanguard: Q1 Earnings Snapshot
NEWPORT BEACH, Calif. — NEWPORT BEACH, Calif. — American Vanguard Corp. (AVD) on Friday reported a first-quarter loss of $8.5 million, after reporting a profit in the same period a year earlier. On a per-share basis, the Newport Beach, California-based company said it had a loss of 30 cents. Losses, adjusted for non-recurring costs, came to 24 cents per share.
