archived: 28 May - 3 Jun, 2006         Back                 Next

                        THE PLATFORM 

The NC Democratic Party’s Platform Committee is on the road again, seeking input from Democrats on the Party’s upcoming release of its Platform.  On Tuesday, Wayne Goodwin chaired the public forum in Durham.   

Democrats can largely expect an updated version of the current Platform.  For all of the turmoil that the lack of any Platform in 2004 caused among Democrats, less than fifteen Democrats turned out in Durham to address the issues.  

The item of real note from the meeting is the organized effort to remove the NC Democratic Party’s support for Roe v. Wade from the Platform.  A right to life Democrat advanced that proposal to the State Platform Committee in Durham.  TPJ understands this has occurred at other meetings of the State Platform Committee.  

The effort, in Durham, seemed to be from only one individual.  If any TPJ readers are familiar with the effort, please write TPJ FEEDBACK.  

The right to life effort bears watching.  

                        THE 11^TH  

A new poll covering the 11^th Congressional District has Shuler leading Taylor: 

If the election were held today, 46 percent of those polled would vote for Shuler and 42 percent for Taylor, according to a poll of 687 likely 11th Congressional District voters. The poll also found that just 13 percent of voters are satisfied with the way things are going in the country, while 81 percent are dissatisfied. 

With “leaners,” the result was 49% Shuler and 45% Taylor.  

The poll also found:  

Voters are also extremely dissatisfied with the way things are going in the country today. Only 13% of voters are satisfied with the way things are going, while 81% are dissatisfied. The news is not much better for President Bush. He receives a 32% approval rating from the 11th District, while 59% disapprove. Forty-seven percent of survey respondents want the Democrats to control Congress next year, while 42% want Republicans to keep control.  

Encouraging news, with several caveats: 

1. The poll has a reported margin of error of 3.7%.  Therefore, Shuler’s “lead” is within outer boundaries of the margin of error.
    

2. The poll is conducted by Public Policy Polling using automated phone calling.  This polling technique is somewhat controversial among pollsters.
    

3. The “right direction/wrong direction” question above is a surprisingly negative result.  The latest national poll to publish findings:
    

Newsweek Poll conducted by Princeton Survey Research Associates International. May 11-12, 2006. N=1,007 adults nationwide. MoE ± 3.
.
"Are you satisfied or dissatisfied with the way things are going in the United States at this time?"
.
		Satisfied	Dissatisfied	Unsure
		%	%	%
	5/11-12/06	23	71	6

            One would not expect to see a full 10% deviation between the national average and the   average in the 11^th District.  

The Public Policy poll is best viewed as demonstrating that Shuler is currently a viable candidate who can win.  Whether Democrats are ultimately successful will depend on whether they avoid excessive exuberance now and dedicate themselves to the daily grind of soliciting and convincing voters. 

_____________________________________________

Updated: May 30, 2006 

                        MYRICK OUT  

Republican Rep. Sue Myrick defies conventional political wisdom and announces that she will not run for Governor in 2008: 

Sue Myrick's decision not to run for governor in 2008 brought relief to potential adversaries and anxiety to other Republicans worried about whether the GOP will finally take back the Executive Mansion.

 

With Myrick's high name recognition, reputation on hot-button issues and a statewide race already under her belt, Myrick, a six-term congresswoman from Charlotte, would have been a strong contender in the GOP primary, observers say.

 

"If she had entered the race, you would have to have considered her the front-runner," said Sen. Tom Apodaca, R-Henderson, the chamber's deputy Republican leader.  . . .

 

"Now that Myrick has withdrawn, the Republicans seem to be at a great disadvantage," said Carmine Scavo, a political-science professor at East Carolina University. 

Rep. Myrick’s announcement leaves Republican State Senator Fred Smith and Republican Bill Graham, a Salisbury attorney, as the principal candidates for the Republicans. 

                        A CONGRESSIONAL QUESTION

TPJ received this question from one of its readers:

Which of the Congressional races look most competitive this year? 

Our current view is that incumbent Democrats will hold every Congressional seat in North Carolina.  Democrats can recapture two Congressional seats held by Republicans; the 11^th and the 8^th. 

Boy Orator of the Neuse’s recent assessment published in TPJ remains highly accurate in our view: 

Kissell [8^th] has a strong shot. I got to sit next to him at JJ (the NDCP's big to-do dinner), as well as next to one of his fundraisers. They have a strong team and a strong message in anti-Republican incumbent times. Why I am convinced? I was talking to his fundraiser saying Kissell needed to be raising more money, to which Kissell's team member responded, 'It's hard because he teaches until 3:15.' That deserves pause, and with enough resources, Kissell can get that to resonate with voters.

 

With that said, November is a long way off. There is plenty of time for the winds to change direction (both good and bad). Looking at turnout numbers, both early and overall, it seems clear Republican voters are demoralized...as they should be. Bush continues his terrible performance (building on his first four years), GOP members continue having legal problems, the country continues to underperform, etc. Low turnout caught Democrats with their pants down in 1994. It may be time for payback.

 

It's not all down and out for the GOP, though. The President probably made his best political decision when he turned Rove loose, back into the waters in which he is most at home. That could spell trouble; do not underestimate that man. I'm not sure they are looking here, but Rove & Co. can pack quite a punch.

 

As for which races will be close, I think the ones to watch are definitely Kissell's and Shuler's [11^th]. Taylor is done in my opinion; while Shuler may not be an Asheville Dem (as most here would prefer), he still brings us one closer to a majority. Not being an Asheville Dem may also be the secret to winning in that district.

 

Hayes is a little safer even though the district is supposedly friendlier to Democratic candidates. Kissell builds steam with each passing day, and victory is definitely in reach (although I'm sure Dunn has made it hard to raise money from the establishment, as they were torched by his dropping out).  

November is a political “life time” away.  While everyone enjoys predicting the races, Democrats need to be focusing on carrying the message of the Democratic Party to citizens in every part of the State. 

_____________________________________________

                        MINIMUM WAGE & TAX CUTS 

Democrats in the NC General Assembly are very close to increasing the minimum wage by $1.00 to $6.15 per hour.  Both Houses have passed a $1.00 increase, but in different bills.   

The major difference is that the NC Senate has coupled a $1.00 increase with several tax cuts targeted at small businesses and a cut in the State’s sales tax in the State budget passed by the Senate last week.  The House passed the minimum wage increase in a stand alone bill. 

The raise will positively effect some 139,000 North Carolinians. 

During the budget crisis of 2001, the state sales tax was raised by ½ of a penny, and the highest rate on personal income taxes was raised to 8.25 percent.  Both of these taxes are set to expire within the next two years. 

With a budget surplus this year, the Senate voted to speed up the expiration of these prior tax increases by cutting the state sales tax by ¼ of a penny and the top income tax rate of 8.25 percent to 8 percent.  Next year, the remainder of the 2001 tax increase will expire. 

Senate Democrats are cutting these taxes earlier than planned for three reasons. 

First, the tax increases passed in 2001 were temporary measures.  Both taxes were never designed to be permanent taxes.  With revenues higher than expected this year, a top priority should be to reduce the tax increases. 

Second, there is an immediate need to stimulate the creation of jobs by small businesses, which create most new jobs in North Carolina.  Increased premiums on health insurance and escalating gas prices are making it particularly difficult for small businesses to hire new employees.  There are 30,000 small businesses that report their income utilizing the personal income tax rate because they are unincorporated.  This tax cut will give these small businesses tax relief that the Senate believes will create more jobs. 

Third, North Carolina has the highest personal income tax rate in the South.  Corporate executive officers from companies considering locating in North Carolina commonly complain about the high tax rate to local economic developers should they decide to support their companies’ expansion or relocation into North Carolina.  Cutting the 2001 tax increases early will help align North Carolina with our sister states with whom we compete for new businesses.  (Critics of the early tax cut cite lowering of this higher income bracket as a tax cut for the rich.) 

The Senate is also freezing the sales tax on gas in this budget.  As gasoline prices have soared, the tax on gasoline has risen, requiring all North Carolinians to pay more at the pump.  This increase has put additional strain on family budgets. 

North Carolina must continue to provide quality roads, and the price of building roads is rising.  The Senate budget will transfer money from the General Fund to the Highway Trust Fund to offset the impact the freeze on the gas tax will have on revenue available for road construction. 

The Republican Party has, predictably, attacked the Senate’s budget.  

The Senate Democrat budget increases government spending $1.6 billion—an increase of almost 10%—to a record $18.8 billion, and squanders more than $2 billion in over collections of taxes.

 

Last year Senate Democrats increased taxes and fees on by over $1 billion creating $2.4 billion dollars in excess collection of taxes this year. This “surplus” should be returned to the people in the form of significant tax cuts or a tax rebate.

 

This budget fails to prioritize spending and plan for North Carolina’s future. The Democrats’ budget spends all of the $2.4 billion in over collections. These unnecessary and misguided spending increases will result in future deficits and tax increases.

 

According to the nonpartisan Tax Foundation, North Carolina currently has the highest tax burden of any state in the Southeast, including the highest gas tax and the highest marginal income tax. This budget does nothing to address this problem.

 

North Carolina’s taxpayers are overtaxed and deserve meaningful tax relief. Our people expected Senate Democrats to keep their repeated promises to finally and completely eliminate the so-called “temporary” sales and income taxes enacted in 2001. This budget again extends the life of these “temporary” taxes, continues the uncontrolled growth of state spending, and minimizes the hope of any future tax relief.

 

The budget process continues to be a closed-door, invitation-only affair which has contributed to the scandals plaguing North Carolina Democrats and embarrassing our great state. 

Yet, six Senate Republicans broke from their Party’s caucus and voted for the budget.   

But other GOP members found it hard to vote against financial improvements to the court and mental health systems as well as reductions in the sales and income taxes.

 

"I voted for all the good in it instead of voting against the things I didn't like," said Sen. Austin Allran, R-Catawba, one of the six Republicans who voted yes Wednesday. 

The Senate’s version of the budget, while far from perfect from the perspective of progressive Democrats, is substantially better than passed in previous sessions.  TPJ kudos for Senate Democrats. 

                        10% -- TAKING MONEY OUT OF POLITICS 

This is TPJ’s fourth article in its series outlining broad parameters for political reform in North Carolina. The platform for this series is Bob Geary’s, The Independent (a TPJ favorite), compelling case that redistricting and the large sums of money needed to mount a campaign have resulted in few contested legislative primaries in North Carolina.    

Geary advances the idea of public financing of Party primary candidates as a needed reform for North Carolina legislative candidates. TPJ advocates simply removing most money from the political process.   

TPJ’s second assertion is that the electorate, its leaders and actually governing are disconnected from either other in critical respects.  That disconnect cannot be addressed solely by public financing of Party primaries. Last week, we advocated the creation of Citizen Councils as a auxiliary to municipal and county governments.  

Today, TPJ recommends that most money simple be removed from the political process.  

The single most expensive aspect of any campaign is media advertising; television, cable and radio being the three principal modes of communicating with the public.  We are besieged with 15, 30 and 60 second ads that do little to inform.   

Candidates are forced to raise huge sums of money to fuel their media campaigns and therein lies the rub.  In order to raise amounts required, candidates increasingly have to rely on individuals and a political PAC’s that have the sums of money that can fuel the media necessary to compete.  Those who have the money gain influence.  

The answer is simply to ban political advertising on television, cablevision and radio.   

In its place, broadcast television, cablevision and radio stations would be required to provide free time to both political parties.  Broadcast television and radio stations use public airways.  The Federal Communications Commission licenses, on behalf of the public, stations to use those airways and renews those licenses on a periodic basis.  

The concept is deceptively simple.  As a requirement of licensure, these media would be required to provide allocated amounts of time to both political parties during their primaries and general election.  Existing Election Boards would devise the regulatory structure to ensure that the time allocated is fairly divided between the parties and their candidates.  

One simple system would be to require free access for 10 full days prior to the primaries and general election.  Regular commercial programming would be suspended.  The time would be allocated between the parties, who would, in turn, allocate time to their candidates in segments of 5, 10, 15 or 30 minutes. Parties could agree to allocate time for their candidates to debate; both in primaries and general elections.  

In return for the right to the public airways, candidates and their political parties and PAC’s would be banned from advertising in these media.  With free access and the ban, a form of “public financing” of elections that can provide the amount of time to effectively communicate with the citizenry is created.  The system is the same in principle as that envisioned by Geary in his article, but the cost is shifted to those who are granted the right to use public airways.  

One can fashion many alternatives for the amount of time allocated and how that time can be used.  Debates in every race?  Give every candidate one hour to be used in 15 minute blocks, which would require some effective discussion of their candidacy.  A combination of these two?   

The obvious distinction between Geary’s public financing of primaries and our approach with free access is that Geary’s proposal requires the collection and allocation of tax dollars to fund campaigns on a massive scale.  With the amounts of money required for effective media coverage, publicly financed candidates are largely crippled from effectively communicating their candidacy.  For example, the candidates for State Supreme Court in North Carolina will receive some $160,000 in the fall to reach millions of voters.  The odds are good that many voters will go the polls knowing little or nothing about the candidates they will vote on.  Free access, in concept, would provide superior ability to communicate.  

Public financing for all elections would require massive amounts of tax dollars.  The political feasibility for such a program is highly problematical.  Free access eliminates taxpayer costs. 

Next week, TPJ will address another aspect of money; individual and PAC contributions. 

Previous Series Features: 

                        10%   
                        10% -- THE FALL OF PARTY, THE RISE OF THE MONEY  
                        10% -- REBUILDING DEMOCRACY    

TAR HEEL DEM CELLAR