RALEIGH – The Civitas Institute has posted an online analysis of who is being arrested at the recent “Moral Monday” demonstrations outside the North Carolina General Assembly.

Civitas analyzed arrest records and other public documents about the people arrested recently for disrupting the legislature. The results of this thorough analysis can be found at  http://www.nccivitas.org/moralmonday/.

“Questions have been raised about who is really involved in these protests,” said Civitas President Francis X. De Luca. “We decided to get some answers. They provide surprising insights about those arrested and where they come from.”

The data and graphics on the site indicate their city and county, age, employment, sex, political party and more. Also, the Pick the Protester game allows viewers to test their intuition about mug shots of those arrested.

Click here to access the site.

The Civitas Institute is a nonpartisan, nonprofit think tank based in Raleigh, NC. More information on Civitas is available at www.nccivitas.org, or contact Jim Tynen at james.tynen@nccivitas.org or (919) 834-2099.

The post Civitas Reveals Who Arrested Protesters Really Are appeared first on Civitas Institute.

WTVD talked with an unamed bill sponsor who said that he had been told the bill won’t pass this year.

On the possibility that legislators would not pass the bill, Moises Serrano of Yadkin County, a rally participant, was quoted as saying: “If not, we will remember come election time, it is an election year next year.” Serrano told WTVD that he and others had registered five thousand voters in Yadkin County.

Now did I get this right? This story was about “undocumented” immigrants, meaning they are not citizens and not qualified to vote – Right?

While Parents for Educational Freedom North Carolina  (PEFNC) is a good organization, and it’s goals — expanded educational opportunities for parents and children — are honorable, I can’t support a provision in the proposed House Budget (see page 70-71) that provides PEFNC close to a half million dollars ($464,100) for a pilot program to develop rural charter schools in under-served counties.

It’s nothing personal PEFNC, it’s the principle.  This isn’t the first time Civitas has opposed providing government tax monies or other assistance to non profits. We have opposed providing public monies for the Public School Forum and the Teaching Fellows program.  We have even opposed money for the NC Symphony and for “grassroots arts” program. Providing taxpayer dollars to private organizations – no matter how public their name may sound — puts government in the position of picking winners and losers.  If It’s wrong for government to provide money for liberal non-profits and for community non-profits, it’s just as wrong for government to provide money for conservative non-profits.

I fully support the idea of developing rural charter schools. I can ‘t support providing tax dollars to PEFNC or any other private entity as the means for doing so.  Good idea;  wrong vehicle.

Civitas Board Chairman Bob Luddy is also on the board of the Rural Economic Development Center (REDC).  The Raleigh News & Observer and Charlotte Observer recently ran stories highlighting questionable practices by the  center, and the N&O followed up with an editorial that concludes “the center has become less about sustaining rural communities and more about sustaining itself by pleasing lawmakers and others who are politically connected.”

In the wake of such publicity, Mr. Luddy sent the following letter to his fellow REDC board members:

Members of the REDC Board:

The News & Observer and Charlotte Observer articles of Saturday and today have shown serious implications in the management and operations of the REDC. These are issues that must be addressed by the entire board to fulfill our fiduciary and legal duties to every taxpayer in our state. The board should immediately hire an independent forensic auditor to begin a review process.

In one case, a grant from the REDC to the Randy Parton Theater caused severe long-term economic harm to the City of Roanoke Rapids, while in other cases the REDC takes job credits for dubious grants laced with political influence. These practices must be terminated immediately by the REDC Board.

Key issues are:

1. Most of the funds held by the REDC rightly belong to the State of North Carolina.  Many grants listed on the  REDC statement on June 30, 2012 are now de-obligated as far back as 2002. This means the Balance Sheet does not accurately reflect the true position at that date.  I have already put the former auditors on notice about their statements, based on information provided by the center. Note spread sheet attached.
2. The relationships among developers, local politicians, bankers, legislators and the Rural Center do not appear to be at arm’s length. The practice of maintaining dossiers on elected officials must be banned summarily.
3. Job creation claims are very deceptive and misleading. Job claims are made concurrent with grants and as you know many times these jobs are not created and or sustained. Grants from the REDC to a project do not mean the center created these jobs, it simply means it provided a grant.
4. Every grant must be voted on individually by the board. This has not been done. Policies of the REDC have not always been followed based on documents recovered and sometimes arbitrarily violated.

Due to the extremely serious implications of potential inappropriate activity and board oversight, the following are my recommendations to the board:

1. The board should hire an independent forensic auditor and attorney to review all transactions of the last five years and all outstanding grants.  Included in this audit will be compliance with all laws, REDC policies and legal board approval. Review balance sheet dated June 30, 2012 based on my memo to McGladrey and all information provided by management and the audit committee.
2. The June 30, 2012 audited statement should be reviewed based on current management information and restated and explained to the board.
3. Funds granted by the state to the REDC should be returned to the NC State Treasury until such time as they are required to meet legal obligations, which are approved by the Board. Request the Governor and General Assembly to withdraw any new funding until completion of both audits and review by the board.
4. Bill Ray Hall should be put on a 90-day non-paid leave of absence during this REDC review process to insure a fair and unbiased outcome. He must be available to answer questions from the auditor and reviewers.
5. Request the NC State Auditor to conduct a complete audit and compliance with state laws.
6. Request the Attorney General to review all transactions for legal compliance especially any allocations of pay-to-play.
7. Every future grant must be reviewed one at a time by the full board and should be subject to challenge by any board member. Full disclosure of every person involved in each grant must be made to the board. This includes beneficiaries, elected officials, developers, bankers, consultants or any related parties.  Every single document must be available for inspection of board members. Discontinue the grant process, effective immediately and indefinitely until all grants are reviewed and verified by the board.
8. The policies related to claiming job creation must be reviewed by the board and the new policy must accurately reflect the truth.

NC Rural counties will achieve a renaissance in economic development, job creation and prosperity based on the following ideas.

• K-12 Education requires dramatic improvement. Many rural students lack educational opportunities and alternative choices, which is imperative for job creation.
• Vocational education must begin in high school to develop a workforce ready for modern technology.
• Rural counties must be open to new charter schools and private schools to meet the needs of all students.
• Science and Math must be stressed since we live in a technological world.
• Entrepreneurs must be encouraged and supported by each community and state. Taxation and regulatory policies must be small business friendly.
• Private investment in manufacturing and technologies is critical to job creation and sustained economic growth.

Student apprenticeships may reflect education’s future 

Every dollar the REDC spends is taken from taxpayers and small business operators (the real job creators).  Apprenticeship programs are one of our greatest needs.  

Bob Luddy
Board Member
Rural Economic Development Center

The post Rural Center Board Member Calls For Comprehensive Audit appeared first on Civitas Institute.

Per WRAL:

The Senate had been scheduled to give its final blessing to a deal that would have curtailed revenue growth by some $4 billion over the next four years by cutting income tax rates. Unlike others plans, including those put forward by the House and prior Senate proposals, it would not have extended the state sales tax but it did potentially tax Social Security income.

However, immediately before the Senate was to debate the bill today, Senate President Pro Tempore Phil Berger pulled it from consideration.

“We are talking with the House and the governor,” Berger told his colleagues.

After session, Berger said that he was leading negotiations on the Senate’s behalf.

The first article of the Civitas Institute’s two-part series on the North Carolina Rural Economic Development Center highlighted its corrupt tactics and the $200,000-plus per year salary of President Billy Ray Hall. To go over all the instances of favoritism over the center’s past 26 years would be overwhelming. The following examples are from the last year alone, when the Rural Center was involved in over 800 projects.

Cronyism

The worst part about the Rural Center is the cronyism. In 2012 alone, seven members of the Rural Center’s 50 person Board of Directors either directly or indirectly received funding for projects for their own departments, businesses, colleagues, or organizations. These individuals are (with size of Rural Center grant):

• Steven Troxler (NC Agriculture Commissioner) – $95,000
• Keith Crisco (Commerce Secretary under Gov. Perdue, grant issued to staff) – $17,000
• Scott Hamilton (CEO, AdvantageWest Economic Development Group) – three grants totaling $437,000
• Andrea Harris (President, NC Institute of Minority Economic Development) – $75,000
• Lenora Jarvis-Mackey (CEO, River City Community Development Corp.) – two grants totaling $115,000
• Howard Jones (CEO, Opportunities Industrialization Center of Wilson) – two grants totaling $435,000
• Mikki Sager (VP, Conservation Fund) — $25,000

Total funding listed above: $1.2 million

The two most disturbing grants listed above are the ones to Agriculture Commissioner Steven Troxler and to a staff person of former Commerce Secretary Keith Crisco. Troxler is an elected official and has been Agriculture Commissioner for the past eight years. In addition to the Rural Center, he is on the board of the Foundation for Soil and Water Conservation and the Biotechnology Center, other wasteful non-profits.

Crisco was appointed Commerce Secretary in 2009. Strangely enough, the Governor’s Office, responsible for appointing Crisco, received $20,000 from the Rural Center to explore sources of renewable energy.

Astoundingly, it is not illegal for a government official to coax the government into giving tax dollars to a private firm, then sit on its Board of Directors and receive money from it. North Carolinians should be outraged. Can you say, “conflict of interest?”

Dollars Down the Drain

Tax dollars aren’t the only kind of waste flowing through the Rural Center. Of the over 800 projects the Rural Center helped to fund last year, more than 35 percent were water and sewer projects. But the Rural Center’s grants account for only a small portion of total funding for water and sewer projects. For instance, a pending grant to the Tuckaseigee Water and Sewer Authority in Jackson County accounts for only 6 percent of total funding for the $14 million project. The rest comes from federal or local government.

Indeed, according to a 2008 report by the North Carolina General Assembly’s Program Evaluation Division there are 12 different entities active in statewide funding efforts for water and sewer infrastructure – in addition to local government’s efforts. These include federal programs, various state agencies, and other non-profit organizations. Such redundancy in water and sewer funding sources led the report to conclude that “water and wastewater funding is provided in a complex and fragmented manner” in North Carolina. Among the report’s recommendations were that North Carolina should rely “less on grants when determining state appropriations for water and wastewater infrastructure.” Translation: the state’s water and sewer needs may be better taken care of without the Rural Center further cluttering the process. Here are some of the entities and programs involved in any given Rural Center project: USDA, DENR, ARC, CWMTF, IDF, CDBG, STAG, COG, CDC. What does all this stand for? MDD — Money Down the Drain. That’s what happens when a horde of agencies gets involved in the sewer and water projects the Rural Center gets involved with.

As anyone who has ever remodeled a bathroom or fixed a toilet will know, the science of plumbing is certainly a tricky skill to master. But surely it should not take a web of bureaucracy along with federal, state, and local governments to extend a sewer line a few hundred yards to a new business.

If the tax dollars were kept in local communities to begin with, the Rural Center’s small grants would be obsolete. Keeping local dollars in the hands of local representatives is the best way to clean up the Rural Center’s waste of time and tax money.

Going Green

Besides sewer and water, Rural Center funding favors the so-called green agenda. These projects include biofuels, wind energy, solar power, and environmentalist education programs. If a green economy is necessary, then businesses will strive to meet consumers’ needs for environmentally-friendly products. But forcing people to fund programs they do not agree with, especially when they involve something as controversial as green energy, is reprehensible.

Looking Out for the Little Guy?

While the center proclaims itself to be the ally of small businesses, its grants often favor large corporations who compete with local farmers and small retail shops. Major companies who benefited from Rural Center grants last year include Wal-Mart, Hampton Inn & Suites, Subway, Ace Hardware, Ford, Caterpillar, Sears, and Wendy’s. So much for looking out for the little guy!

In addition, funding to local cities and counties accounted for 75 percent of all Rural Center grantees last year. In essence, the state diverts money away from local communities and siphons it through the Rural Center to give a small portion of it back to local communities. Meanwhile, the runoff of salaries to state and Rural Center employees floods bureaucrats’ bank accounts while drying up rural communities.

Conclusion

The Rural Center is a prime example of unnecessary government cronyism at its worst. It has empowered a group of unelected, unaccountable bureaucrats with hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars. Much of their activity is either redundant, wasteful or appears to benefit its own board members.

Its high time state lawmakers consider sparing taxpayers from having to continue funding this highly questionable organization.

The post North Carolina Rural Economic Development Center Exposed Part II: Government Waste Flushed Down Rural Center appeared first on Civitas Institute.

While I’m in favor of eliminating state income taxes — for all North Carolinians,  the Superintendent’s comments miss the mark and cloud over important points.

First, DPI cites National Education Association salary survey data as the source of NC’s ranking (46th) .  However NEA data include salary only and not benefits or other forms of compensation.  It should also be noted the data does not account for regional differences in cost of living. While teachers in California or New Jersey may have higher salaries, a dollar spent in North Carolina can generally go farther than a dollar in other high cost of living states.

Second, some of the current financial difficulties teachers feel have been inflicted by an ill-fitting teacher salary schedule.  The current salary structure for teachers provides small step increases on the front end and more on the back end. (For a good analysis of the problems with NC’s Teacher Salary Schedule see here.) The current salary schedule also bases increases not on student performance but by years of  experience and credentials – two criteria that have no direct linkage to improved student performance.   The emphasis on time contributes to the unacceptable situation where  excellent teachers and average teachers are making the same salary.  That’s the sad state of affairs in many districts  and why we must find a better way to pay teachers; one that rewards performance and gives local school officials flexibility.  We all know excellent job performance needs to be rewarded. Local education officials need flexibility to attract and retain good teachers.  These realities have propelled  the inclusion of a Teacher Compensation Study in the Senate budget bill and hopefully the outlines for a new way to compensate teachers. That’s a far better long-term solution to resolving the current problems.

…In [Governor’s McCrory’s] first week in office, something happens that we deem immoral and extreme…We had to have a moral challenge because these policies they were passing, in rapid-fire, were constitutionally inconsistent, morally indefensible, and economically insane.

There’s a lot here in this section. Essentially, it sums up Barber’s justification for mass lawbreaking. So I’d like to pick this apart a little bit, sentence by sentence.

…Something happens that we deem immoral and extreme.

It’s funny how the plural pronoun can be used to gain credibility and distance at the same time. If you say, “I deemed this to be immoral and extreme,” your credibility comes under scrutiny. But if you say “We deemed this to be immoral and extreme,” suddenly you are both unassailable and disassociated from ownership or responsibility.

But it bears asking – who is Reverend Barber to “deem” anything? Is he an elected official? Was he elevated by the ballot box to a position of trust and authority? No – he was not.

We had to have a moral challenge because these policies they were passing…were constitutionally inconsistent, morally indefensible, and economically insane.

Apparently the majority of North Carolina does not agree, seeing as they picked these officials to enact exactly those policies.

Now, I’m not saying the majority is always right. As I’ve said earlier, people have a sacred right to dissent and protest in this country. But Barber is not just protesting. He is encouraging people to disrupt and break the system. It is one thing to protest in a city park, or on a public street. But that’s not what Moral Mondays are. Instead, protestors are intentionally breaking the law in order to arrested and bring more media attention to their cause. In the process, they are wreaking havoc on the Wake County criminal justice system.

Here’s another part of Barber’s interview that is worthy of closer scrutiny:

We just delivered a letter to the governor and the speaker saying, you’ve got the power to stop this. Just reconsider your attacks on Medicaid, voting rights, the unemployed, and the poor. If you don’t, then we will probably escalate in some ways – I’m not going to say how – because what they’re not going to do is live in peace while they hurt so many people and destroy so many lives.

That sounds awfully close to a threat. It sounds awfully close to coercion. It sounds awfully close to holding a metaphorical  gun to the heads of elected officials and forcing them to execute the will of an unelected and tiny minority  – or else.

To use one of the Rev. Barber’s favorite phrases: “That’s immoral. That’s extreme.”

What if I were to coax you into accepting a loan with money I stole from you? You’d probably call the police and have me arrested as a thief and a con artist. But here’s a news flash: The state government and the North Carolina Rural Economic Development Center (Rural Center) have been practicing this scheme for the past 26 years.

Back in the 1980s the North Carolina General Assembly implemented a largely untested method to spur economic growth. Lawmakers established a number of Special Purpose Nonprofits, entrusting them with millions in tax dollars to supposedly create jobs. Such organizations included the Rural Center, the North Carolina Biotechnology Center (Biotech Center) and the Technological Development Authority. Despite efforts in the ’90s to make it self-sufficient, the Biotech Center still relies heavily on tax dollars. Additionally, in a1992 report to the General Assembly, the Rural Center stated their plan to “diversify its funding base,” but twenty years later the Center continues to regularly receive roughly 70 percent of its funding from the state budget. Adding to the “special purpose nonprofit” gravy train is the NC Biofuels Center, founded in 2007 and promised to be permanently funded by taxpayers.

By far, the Rural Center is the biggest source of waste among these organizations. For example, one of the many ventures of the Rural Center is the Microenterprise Loan Program. Essentially, the state government collects tax dollars and then forces rural entrepreneurs into debt to the Rural Center to get a portion of those bucks back to start a small business. The state government then collects taxes on the new small businesses via the income tax, and the cycle continues. What this scheme fails to realize is that if the money were left in the pockets of private citizens, more money would be available to start small businesses in the first place.

But it gets even worse. Not only is the Rural Center state-funded, it is also prejudiced. The Rural Center discriminates on the basis of race and gender in the name of equality and social justice so that only a select group is eligible for the center’s interest-reduction programs. No private lender would ever get away with implementing these criteria. So much for social justice!

Thankfully, the amount of tax dollars tangled up in the Rural Center has declined in recent years. The Center went from receiving a whopping  $143 million  five years ago to $28 million  two years ago. The recently proposed McCrory FY 2013-14 budget recommended trimming funding down to $6 million. According to WRAL, Bill Ray Hall, the center’s president, objected to this, saying that the Rural Center cannot spur job growth with such a small budget.

But don’t be deceived. Just because it’s called the Rural Economic Development Center does not mean that it actually helps rural economies. If there’s one thing politicians know how to do, it’s how to make corruption attractive by wrapping it in the swaddling clothes of innocence. Under the McCrory plan, the Rural Center might only get $6 million, but that does not mean that rural North Carolina will only receive $6 million. It just means that state funding will be distributed to rural counties via different distributional methods. Besides, the Rural Center reports it has more than $160 million in assets and savings. How about using some of that loose change before demanding more tax dollars?

In case you are worried about the state funding decrease  harming the bank accounts of the Rural Center’s employees, most of whom ironically work in urban Wake County, don’t be. Billy Ray Hall, for instance, has been paid well in the past 26 years as the center’s president. His most recent salary is reported to be $214,000 a year. And that’s not counting benefits. Not bad for a non-profit employee.

In the next article we’ll follow the money trail and expose how wasteful this scheme is. Also, make sure to check out the video interview below with Rural Center Board Member and CaptiveAire Systems President (and also Civitas Institute Board Chair) Robert Luddy. He will give you an insider’s perspective and advice on what we can do to clean up the corruption.

The post North Carolina Rural Economic Development Center Exposed Part I: Rural Center Scheme Robs Taxpayers appeared first on Civitas Institute.

Take the quiz now to find out!

Click on an answer and see if you are correct!

1. How many bills were introduced in the 2013 session of the North Carolina General Assembly?

   • 2,671
   • 1,594
   • 1,738
   • 3,564
   1,738 is the correct number of bills introduced in the 2013 session of the NC General Assembly. 1,594 bills were introduced in 2011, 2,671 bills were introduced in 2009, 3,564 bills were introduced in 2007.
   
   Source: NCGA, http://www.ncga.state.nc.us/gascripts/lastaction/lastaction.pl?Biennium=2013&SessionNumber=1

2. How many bills were introduced in the State Senate in the 2013 session?

   • 736
   • 726
   • 1.069
   • 1,538
   726 bills were introduced in the State Senate in the 2013 legislative session. 736 bills were introduced by the State Senate in 2011, 1,069 bills were introduced by the State Senate in 2009, 1,538 bills were introduced by the State Senate in 2007.

3. How many bills were introduced in the State House of Representatives in the 2013 legislative session?

   • 1,602
   • 858
   • 1,012
   • 2,026
   1,012 bills were introduced in the 2013 legislative session of the State House. 858 bills were introduced by the State House in 2011, 1,602 bills were introduced by the State House in 2009, 2,026 bills were introduced by the State House in 2007.

4. True or false: The kinds of laws by the North Carolina General Assembly may be classified under four general heads:

   1. Laws regulating individual conduct
   2. Laws providing for services by the State
   3. Laws determining how much money shall be raised by the State and for what purposes it shall be spent
   4. Amendments to the State Constitution
   • True
   • False
   There is a fifth head to add to the four displayed, it is:
   
   5. Laws empowering or directing local governments to act.
   
   Read more about each classification

5. True or false: The General Assembly meets once every two years.

   • True
   • False
   The General Assembly meets in regular session beginning in January of each odd-numbered year, and adjourns to reconvene the following even-numbered year for a shorter session.
   
   Source: http://www.ncga.state.nc.us/gascripts/lastaction/lastaction.pl?Biennium=2013&SessionNumber=1

6. True or false: The House of Representatives is presided over by a Speaker, elected from its membership. The presiding officer of the Senate is called the President Pro Tempore and is elected from its membership.

   • True
   • False
   The presiding officer of the Senate (called the President of the Senate) is the Lieutenant Governor of the State. She/he has no vote in the Senate except to break a tie. The Senate and House also elect other officers from their respective memberships including a President Pro Tempore in the Senate.

The post Civitas Quiz: Bills in 2013 Session appeared first on Civitas Institute.

Recent media reports have suggested that the protesters disrupting the General Assembly at “Moral Mondays” represent a cross-section of North Carolina citizens. We decided to investigate that claim. Using arrest records and other public documents, we investigated who really is involved in these protests. The graphics below detail a few of our findings prior to the June 10 arrests. We are now analyzing information from the June 10 and June 12 arrests, and next week we will post even more details about those arrested in these demonstrations.

Meanwhile, check out for yourself if the people getting arrested at “Moral Mondays” truly represent our state.” And keep an eye on this site; we’ll continue to report on the protestors as long as these events continue.

View the composition of the protestors by:

The post Anatomy of ‘Moral Monday’ Protesters appeared first on Civitas Institute.

After reading House Bill 976, the Gun Safety Act, it becomes hard to believe that Joe Biden, Diane Feinstein and Andrew Cuomo are nowhere to be found roaming the halls of the North Carolina General Assembly. After all, the Gun Safety Act reads as though it is straight out of their no-compromise, gun control playbook. Filled to the brim with left-wing fantasy regulations, HB 976 is this week’s Bad Bill of the Week.

Sponsored by Representatives Paul Luebke (D- Durham), Pricey Harrison (D- Guilford), Verla Insko (D- Orange), and Alma Adams (D-Guilford), the Gun Safety Act seems to operate under the assumption that gun “safety” is best defined as any regulation that makes it more difficult for ordinary North Carolinians to legally acquire or own a firearm.  Sweeping in nature, the bill targets gun ownership in one fell legislative swoop. Included is the usual gun control wish list: the repeal of the Castle Doctrine, a liability insurance requirement for pistol ownership, a requirement for victims of stolen firearms to report it within 48 hours (or be charged with a crime),  a requirement for Sheriffs to report any irregularities from background checks to the NICS, and a law forbidding firearms from being stored anywhere a person under 18 can access it. In short, Vice President Biden would be proud.

However, it does not stop there. What is most notable about the Gun Safety Act are the rigid background checks for all private handgun sales. In order to sell a handgun from a private collection, North Carolinians would have to go to a licensed gun dealer to acquire a background check (which would cost up to $10) for the individual seeking to purchase the gun. Only after this background check is completed can the sale legally continue, and any violation of this section would result in a Class 1 misdemeanor and a two year prohibition from possessing a firearm. What does this mean? If you want to sell a handgun from your private collection, perhaps to a friend or neighbor you have known and trusted your entire life, you would not be able to do so unless that person has been approved by a criminal background check.

Interestingly enough,  all of this is done in the name of “safety,” while information supporting the effectiveness of strict gun control is tenuous at best. For instance, according to the Brady Campaign, California has the strictest gun control laws in the country. According to the FBI, relative to their populations, the number of gun murders in California is substantially higher than it is in Utah (where they have the least restrictive gun policies in the country)[1]. Furthermore, states associated with the highest rates of gun ownership, such as Wyoming (nearly 60% of the state owns a gun according to this study), are often among the states where the least amount of gun violence can be found. While this does not definitively prove or disprove the effectiveness of gun control, it does suggest that easier access to guns certainly does not automatically translate to more gun related tragedies.

Legislators better have compelling arguments and evidence before they impose intrusive and unnecessary regulations on North Carolinians. In this case, North Carolina would be wise to say no to The Gun Safety Act and its flippant attitude towards the 2nd amendment. Because it is unlikely to make anyone any safer and infringes on basic rights of gun ownership, HB 976 is this week’s Bad Bill of the Week.

The post HB 976: Gun-Grabber Wish List appeared first on Civitas Institute.

SB 306 passed concurrence in the Senate. Civitas has shared many stories of families who are the real victims of the Racial Justice Act. After SB 306 passed through the Senate and House, we began to hear from other families and how the Racial Justice Act affected them. Families know the fight and closure are long from over, but they are relieved the Racial Justice Act will be no more.

Below is a piece from a victim’s family that details many of the emotions one goes through when someone is murdered, and when they realize closure is jeopardized. The picture below is of Deborah Jane Henley.

The Racial Justice Act is a ridiculous and heart-breaking piece of legislation has been shielded by the fear and threat of appearing racist if you oppose it. I should know. I have been accused of such in opposing it. I have been called racist. (I am bi-racial, white and Asian). I have been called ignorant. (I graduated cum laude from Salem College and am a certified research coordinator and project manager for a teaching hospital where I work with both NIH-funded and pharmaceutical company-funded research trials.) I have been called closed-minded — among other things.

The truth is I am a pretty passionate liberal. I believe whole-heartedly in equal rights for all and have openly and proudly demanded equality for all races and sexual orientations. I admit this state has a tainted past when it comes to race relations and I do not doubt the accuracy of the research that shows a bias in the prosecution of its accused. I also know this: I actually took the time to understand what the Racial Justice Act (RJA) said, something I am positive Bev Perdue did not do.

With the RJA, this state handed a “freebie” to every death row inmate who could take the time to appeal. It has cost this state an unimaginable amount in filing fees, court fees, attorney’s fees alone. Would that cost be worth it to save an innocent life? Of course, but this act did not have that intention. This act was another way to abolish the death penalty in this state, without having the courage to reveal what it truly was. Those who support this act know not what they support. This law is robed in its disguise of “racial justice” when in reality it makes a mockery of the idea. It uses the anger and passion people rightfully have against the injustices of racism to conceal the law as it changes our state entirely. It is a Trojan Horse, disguising its true effect of re-victimizing the families of homicide victims.

I am ashamed that under normal circumstances I would probably have followed suit and like a sheep gotten in line to defend this legislation. The idea is a grand one and a noble one. This act however does not protect us from racism, not at all. With RJAs open language and dependency on statistics over evidence, it is laughable to think it would protect anyone or anything. There is no nobility to it.

So why did I research this act? Why am I writing? Because in this case I am not a researcher, I am not a liberal, I am not an activist, I am not a protestor — I am a homicide survivor.

In 1991, when I was only 7 years old, Carl Stephen Moseley (a white male) sexually assaulted and murdered my aunt, Deborah Jane Henley (a white female). He did not “just” murder her; he tortured her. She was stabbed multiple times, beaten brutally, had incisions down her chest, was sexually assaulted with a blunt object, and ultimately strangled. She did not know Moseley. She did not seek him out; he found her. He had done this before (to another white female).. Newspaper articles have even hinted at blaming the victim. My aunt was at a night club and I guess that made her deserve what happened. Funny how the most “equality-minded” “journalists” can become everything they claim to hate and blame a woman for violence against her when it suits their needs and supports their argument.

I was 7 years old and I remember every minute of the ordeal: the phone call, the waiting, the cameras, the trial. I was in 2nd grade and became used to being picked up from school to accompany my mom back to court where the trial was going on. She says she needed me there. She needed to know I was safe. On that July night in 1991 when Carl Moseley killed my aunt, he also killed a part of each member of my family.

As I grew I researched more and more about the trial and the trial summary, trying to understand why. Why did he have to do this? Why so violent? Why?

There is no answer. Men like Carl Moseley are monsters. My family has suffered enough and is being re-victimized by this state and the supporters of the RJA. A large part of me believes another execution will never occur in North Carolina. There always seems to be some reason to delay the execution of these horrible human beings. I pray I am wrong. I pray my mother will get to watch Carl Moseley take his last breath, and though I know this will not heal the hurt or bring my aunt back, it will restore some part of my family’s belief in justice — an eye for an eye — that is true equality.

For the first time in a while I have a glimmer of hope that day may come. Thank you for fighting for a worthy cause and not being intimidated by the name-calling and misconceptions of those who oppose you.

With much gratitude,

Ashley Widener McFadden
Winston-Salem, NC

(on behalf of the family of Deborah Jane Henley (1953-1991))

The post SB 306: The Racial Justice Act and One Family’s Emotions appeared first on Civitas Institute.

Let’s say you’re an ordinary citizen and you trespass on someone’s property. You come back the next day anyway. You get arrested again, and this time you’re charged with contempt. Wait – what’s that? You’re the Rev. William Barber? Never mind. Please, come inside.

The legal situation surrounding weekly protests at the Legislative Building in Raleigh is growing murkier. If you’ve been following the coverage of “Moral Mondays,” you may have heard the term “civil disobedience” being tossed around. It’s an evocative word: it hearkens to mind the courage of Henry David Thoreau, who willingly consigned himself to prison rather than support a war of aggression in Mexico. It summons images of the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr., braving the fire hoses and police dogs in Alabama. You might think that the protesters arrested these past weeks at “Moral Mondays” have been braving some of the same hardships.

Nope.

Protesters who are arrested do not spend any time in incarceration. Most of them are cuffed with plastic flexi-cuffs instead of metal handcuffs. They get supportive hugs from General Assembly police officers.  The NAACP provides free lawyers to anyone arrested, and the protesters are home by midnight. Oh, and they get souvenirs, too.

Apparently some people in the criminal justice system think that this is still too onerous a process. Colin Willoughby, the Wake County District Attorney, told Civitas that he suggested to police that it “might be appropriate to issue citations” to demonstrators instead of arresting them. In other words, protesters could get a ticket and a fine instead of being charged with a misdemeanor. And Sam Higdon, the assistant director of the Wake County detention center, told us that it was recently “agreed that the CCBI [City-County Bureau of Identification] would not process them.” This, despite the fact that the CCBI has processed all of the demonstrators previously arrested. According to General Assembly Police Chief Jeff Weaver: “The CCBI director, Sam Pennica, stated his budget would not allow him to have additional personnel on site for any more of these arrests.”

Now that the CCBI is out of the loop, arrest reports are no longer readily accessible to the public through the online Wake County Police to Citizen (P2C) portal. Farewell, transparency.

But hey, at least we can take comfort in the fact that the police and District Attorney’s Office are enforcing the law. Or are they?

According to Lauren Ernhardt, an Assistant Attorney General with the state: “In my past experience as a prosecutor, oftentimes when someone was charged with second-degree trespass they were told not to come back, ever.” A protester writing in the liberal Daily Kos confirmed: “Those of us who have been arrested are prohibited from stepping foot into the General Assembly building and the Legislative Office Building until our cases are fully adjudicated.”

So here’s a question. Barber, the president of the NC NAACP, was arrested on April 30. But he has been consistently in the General Assembly every Monday since his arrest (with the exception of this Monday). So have other leaders from the NAACP, the Council of Churches, and other liberal organizations. Why have these people been allowed back into the General Assembly, when they’ve been previously trespassed?

Jeff Weaver, chief of the General Assembly Police, explained that the first 17 protesters – including Barber and other top leaders in Moral Mondays – were inexplicably not prohibited from returning to the General Assembly.

So who in the criminal justice system is responsible for this special treatment? Why are the Rev. Barber and 16 others not subject to the same restrictions as every other protester? Who made that call – was it a magistrate or a district attorney?

Either way, Moral Mondays could be called Murky Mondays. Maybe – maybe – next week will bring some clarity.

The post ‘Moral Mondays’ Getting Murkier appeared first on Civitas Institute.

June 11, 2013
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
CONTACT: Brian Balfour (919) 834-2099 Brian.Balfour@NCCivitas.org

RALEIGH — The North Carolina Senate Finance Committee today introduced a tax reform package that eliminates the corporate tax, lowers and flattens personal income taxes, and eliminates the sales tax on food.

“Civitas has advocated for the elimination of income taxes for several months now, and it is encouraging to see the Senate step up and eliminate what many economists believe to be the state tax most harmful to economic growth: the corporate income tax,” said Civitas Institute Policy Director Brian Balfour.

In an extensive study examining the impact of state taxes on economic growth published by Civitas last December, research concluded that states without a corporate income tax enjoyed a sizeable economic growth advantage over those states with a corporate income tax. Indeed, during the last decade, states with no corporate tax enjoyed a larger growth premium than even those states with no personal income tax but with a corporate tax.

“Another significant benefit of eliminating the corporate income tax is that it strikes a blow against the corporate welfare game,” added Balfour. “The majority of targeted tax credits that benefit politically-connected corporations at the expense of their competitors are granted through the corporate tax. The Senate plan would remove that aspect of political privilege and move the state toward a more level playing field.”

The newly released Senate tax reform package would make North Carolina even more competitive than the House plan and the previously discussed Senate plan. The Tax Foundation indicated that those plans would improve North Carolina’s business tax climate ranking significantly from the current slot of seventh worst in the nation. The Foundation projected the House plan would improve North Carolina’s ranking to 19th best and the previously-discussed Senate plan would boost our ranking to 13th best.

With the elimination of the corporate tax, however, the Tax Foundation reports that the new Senate reform plan would vault North Carolina into the sixth most business-friendly tax climate.

Lastly, research has shown that the corporate tax places a drag on worker wages. Empirical evidence strongly suggests that removing the financial and compliance burden of the corporate tax will result in higher employee pay.

The Civitas Institute is a nonpartisan think tank based in Raleigh, NC. More information on the Civitas Institute is available at www.nccivitas.org, or contact Jim Tynen at james.tynen@nccivitas.org or (919) 834-2099.

The post N.C. Senate Responds with Bold Tax Plan, Eliminates Major Growth Obstacle appeared first on Civitas Institute.