Carolina Journal Radio No. 901: Kamala Harris’ potential impact on N.C. presidential vote

To current and the largest city in the statehouse into the schoolhouse Carolina Journal radio your weekly news magazine discussing North Carolina's most of public-policy events and issues welcome to Carolina Journal reveal why Mitch coca during the next hour, Donna Martinez and I will explore some major issues affecting our state US Supreme Court rejected any new cases this year dealing with the Second Amendment, a Campbell Law school gun rights expert offers his take on the high court's decision North Carolina voters will decide this fall. Who will run the general assembly for the next two years will hear election projections from two veteran political strategists, the John Locke foundation is helping push for new privacy protection for donors to nonprofit groups who here highlights from a recent forum on the topic. Plus will list key questions Gov. Roy Cooper should answer about state government's response to covert, 19 questions about issues such as nursing homes, Medicaid expansion hydroxychloroquine. Those topics are just ahead.

But first, Donna Martinez joins us with the Carolina Journal headline well. We have ourselves a presidential race. The Democrats will field Joe Biden and California Sen., Harris as their president and vice president ticket Joe Biden choosing, Harris a mid-50s a woman out of the state of California. She is the daughter of Jamaican and Indian immigrants Rick Henderson as editor-in-chief of Carolina Journal Carolina Journal and Carolina Journal.com following and reporting on election 2020 for you Rick. Welcome back to the show thanks to tell us what we know other than the fact that that she's from California Sen., Harris felt she will now has become the first interracial vice presidential nominee in the nation's history. She is as you said comes from our parents, who were born in India and Jamaica and so she both is is considered for all census purposes of field we both Afro-American and Asian American and so that's the first vice presidential nominee to to a fill both of those ethnic qualifications.

She was a prosecutor in California before becoming the state Atty. Gen. and then coming Sen. from California with her terms schedule 11 2022.

See somebody who ran for president and didn't do very well during the presidential race and it's she's a bit of all people say that she's probably the safest pick that the vice president could've made simply because she's been vetted thoroughly. She's run for president. So therefore there probably are the skeletons in the closet that had already been aired during the course of her run.

She's worked very well known to raise lots of money. In fact she's got campaign contributions for both Pres. Trump and his daughter in the Jerez is for Atty. Gen. -like and races for Atty. Gen. offered offered to set it so she's she's a very effective fundraiser. She somebody who actually asked with Pres. Trump is going to be somewhat harmed by the fact that you're not going to have big rallies and rope lines and things like that because she actually works those crowds very well. The absence of that is probably not going to help that campaign very much where she comes down and of interest is that she makes it difficult for the president and the vice president to make the case that they are the law and order candidates because of her record as Atty. Gen. in California which actually has a lot of civil libertarians really upset because she was such an aggressive prosecutor.

In fact, she is noted for a number of actions not pursuing police corruption very aggressively being very active in attempts to gain the donor list of 501(c)(3) nonprofits which is unconstitutional action. According to the US Supreme Court trying to out group so she was part of the group of state attorneys general, who were after groups on the on the right who were getting some grant money from various fossil fuel organizations and their packs and packs with their but there sure organizations and so they're all sorts of things that raise concerns for her. Among the civil liberty side of the issues, but probably because most of those groups tend to lean Democratic to forget about all fat and just simply say, well, she's a political of the survivor who knows how to position yourself well run for office here that's very interesting what you bring up because you have to wonder if that time her reputation as a strong prosecutor won't ruffle the feathers of members of the Democratic Party and also she was on the debate stage with Joe Biden and other Democratic candidates and were buying for the presidential nomination.

At one point in one debate last year she went after Joe Biden the man she's now accepted the ticket from she went after him on racial issues. So is that could harm her. Seems like it's a ready-made ad for the Trump campaign, but does it hurt her with the Democrats are probably not because you're going to forget about all those things disappear down the memory hole very quickly.

Now that she's on the ticket. One thing about her that her pic is reminiscent to me in a lot of ways of the pickup that Bill Clinton made about Gore back in 1902 in that you have someone who was standing Sen. who had who was considered to be in the center of the Democratic Party, though, Harris is certainly to the left of the American median voter. She may be in the center of the Democratic Party, but she was someone who's considered to be the safe pick maybe a little bit of a redundant pick on the part of Bill Clinton, but she was somebody who basically progressives got along with okay because they were hoping that they were good good cabinet fixes something John Shelton read the retired UNC sociologist wrote an article in reason that I was involved with Becca back in the day in which the progressives said well you know what she may not be our favorite candidate. We preferred say was with wanted Massachusetts to be a candidate instead of Kabul Harris but will take it because we think that you help us with. If you're the Trump campaign. Are you happy in terms of what you're now facing. Are you concerned or somewhere in the middle.

Probably in the middle. I think where she's going to make a big impact is that she's going to solidify the Biden ticket's support in the African-American and minority communities in general and that she does not harm that all we anticipated this with the vice president said I'm going to pick a woman is probably not going to be a white woman to be my vice presidential choice. And so, but I think this probably solidifies that.

I think that that she's going to bring out the black voters who didn't seem to come out as much for Hillary Clinton which was surprising in 2016 present troubles doing very well with black voters until the pandemic hit and will see if that support stays usual for a Republican, given all the sorts of baggage is been around him. He done real well because of the economic progress that had been made by black Americans from pandemic yet so that may nullify some of that support. I think this should be a very strong campaigner if you can raise money you she can shake $1 trillion fallout and so that will help the Biden campaign, Trump campaign probably should be concerned about that because that could put some southern states and play with huge show you with large percentages of African-American voters, including North Carolina, including North Carolina.

That's right. And it also could help you out with some congressional races and the like to see me that I think that's what the they should be concerned about.

I do think that there's enough baggage there that there they will try to make hay with that, the question is, most of the baggage concerning her friends that she has backed away from Medicare for all, so she still support some sort of private health insurance just more the left than what the Republicans want.

She has backed away. She says from some of her support of prosecutions and one more for criminal justice reform that's believable or not but nonetheless she said that so she's enough of a chameleon politically that.that should cause some concern for the should we expect to see Sen. Harris set in North Carolina yes very much so because she's going to be trying to one race in particular Pat Timmons Goodson, who was former's report justice. I believe running in the eighth congressional district and she is reckless showing the district against Richard Hudson. Richard had said yes I and she's true that she will be appearing in that area to try to take that scene with the Republicans. And as you mentioned that the African-American community hasn't turned out at the highest levels that we've seen since 2008 when Barack Obama was on the ballot and certainly that it's the hope of Democrats to try to turn out that community at those types of levels in order to take not only the White House but all of the battleground seats that will be required to get them there. Yet, this right is going to be his go-between at issue. This is this is a she is a base selection choosing something to stimulate the Democratic base and so that's really looking at here.

All right tell Carolina journal is on-the-job reporting on all of these key races gently here in North Carolina you can check out Carolina journal.com Rick Henderson is editor-in-chief.

Thank you. Thank you. Say when that's much more Carolina journal ready in just tired of fake names tired of reporters with political axes to grind. What you need to be reading Carolina journal, honest, uncompromising, old-school journalism, you expect and you need even better, the monthly Carolina journal is free to subscribers sign up@carolinajournal.com you'll receive Carolina journal newspaper in your mailbox each month. Investigations into government spending revelations about boondoggles. The powerful leaders are and what they're doing in your name and with your money. We shine a light on it all with the stories and angles.

Other outlets barely cover but there's a bonus print newspapers published monthly by our daily news site gives you the latest news each and every day lot onto Carolina journal.com once, twice, even three times a day won't be disappointed. It's fresh news if you'd like a heads up on the daily news sign up for daily email do that Carolina journal.com Carolina journal rigorous unrelenting old-school journalism. We hold government accountable for you. Welcome back Carolina journal radio I Michiko guy, the US Supreme Court has decided to punt on the Second Amendment rejecting any new cases dealing with gun rights. Why that question prompted a recent online forum from the John Locke foundation Campbell Law school professor Greg Wallace offered expert analysis Supreme Court in 2008, decided the Heller case Heller versus District of Columbia. In that case the Supreme Court for the first time held that the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms is an individual right. It is a right that exists primarily for the purpose of self-defense but that's not the end of the story. A number of lower courts have pretty much gone soft on the Second Amendment. So many Second Amendment scholars and proponents have called out for the Supreme Court to take another case to clarify some of the things that were not addressed in the Heller case since Heller had to do only with the possession of a firearm in the hold these lower courts almost unanimously, with one exception in the DC circuit have held that the prohibitions on the public carry of firearms don't really reach to the core of the Second Amendment.

Wallace says that's why gun rights supporters have focused new attention on the Supreme Court Second Amendment proponents have one of the court to take another case we thought that might happen this year. The court seemed to be holding back a number of Second Amendment cases tend to be specific that it Re-listings for conference each month.

Some of them had been on the list is as long as a year and Second Amendment scholars were hoping that the court would pick one or more of those cases and agreed to hear them. The court said no were not going to hear any of these 10 and denied review in all of those cases. Why is it so important for the Supreme Court to act to the lower courts are not applying the Second Amendment with with with any sense of seriousness in my view and I think we need a corrective case, a case that that answer some of these questions that Heller left open. We need the court to come out with a good solid Second Amendment case that that corrects these lower court decisions it it doesn't look like it's going to happen this year. Of course, and and probably not next year, Wallace next addressed the key question. Why doesn't the Supreme Court want to address second amendment cases that you only need four votes to get the case before the Supreme Court, but I think the four Justices Alito, Thomas Cavanaugh, and Gorsuch are afraid that Chief Justice Roberts will not vote with them and so I think they're going to wait until after the election and to actually get another justice on the Supreme Court of Trump. If Trump wins. That's Campbell University law professor Greg Wallace participating in a recent John Locke foundation online forum. Why does Second Amendment law matter to people in states like North Carolina.

We have a North Carolina right now where a shall issue state. But if the Democrats gain control of the state legislature and continue to reelect a Democratic governor that could change to bring North Carolina law and align with what's happening in New Jersey and Maryland, Massachusetts, so I think the key here is Chief Justice Roberts I don't know why he all of a sudden has become much more squishy if you want to use that term. He's an incrementalist. He doesn't like the court to make news.

He doesn't like big decisions, but I would think if he talks about stare decisis about following the court's prior opinions, but I don't know why he would not be willing to follow the court's prior opinion in Heller. It's just it's a head scratcher to me. I don't know what's going on with him but I do think coming.

The best explanation is that the four justices that could vote for taking one of these very important cases have have not done so because they're worried about some other things.

Vote on the court. It's better you know to leave it as it is to go up there and get a five for decision with Roberts voting with the other four liberal justices to curtail Heller. Wallace reminded his audience of anti-gun legislation in other states what these states have done is by statute. They have said okay we can regulate this right to carry in public Heller doesn't deal with public carry.

It only deals with possessing a gun in the home.

We can regulate this right to carry in public and attach conditions to it in one of those conditions is that you can't carry in public were not even give you a license to carry a concealed weapon unless you have some special or are unusual need for it and the effect of those laws is really to deny about 95% of the people within that state the right to carry concealed in public.

Now that the Second Amendment says, look, this is a right to keep and bear arms, and that suggests that the bearing of arms house to do were the keeping maybe has to do more with what you do in your home.

The bearing of arms has more to do with what you do in public and so this is why it would've been great for the Supreme Court to have accepted review of one of these cases. But it lasted not there some good news. Many states including North Carolina have refrained from placing new burdens on gun rights. It takes a restrictive law that is challenged to get into the courts and trigger these bad court decisions.

If the law is not restrictive but rather protective of the right to keep and bear arms. Those laws are not going to see the inside of a court room so we were talking about really changing the landscape. It has to start with the laws themselves. If North Carolina goes to the Democrats in terms of the Gen. assembly as well as the governorship, then I would fully expect to happen in North Carolina. What is happened in Virginia with these draconian gun laws and unfortunately if there challenge the Fourth Circuit is is one of the most anti-gun circuits in the country and were not going to get any headway there and we can only hope that at some point down the line. The Supreme Court will take up another one of these cases, but in the short run.

It's going to depend ultimately on the people that we put in office, Wallace says current events have had an impact on the gun debate. We have seen a huge increase in the number of people buying guns. First of all, the first wave came with COBIT in the second wave has come on the heels of these riots and calls to defund the police. This is been one of the basic tenants of the pro-gun-control argument is that you shouldn't have guns because the police have guns. And if you're in trouble call the police will now you know many on the left want to defund the police and so were pretty much left it out ourselves and and I heard more than one person say that what's happened on the heels of the coated and the rioting is that the argument for gun control now is dead and will be dead to the next couple of years when people even people on the left. Even the liberals are buying guns now at a record rate that's Campbell University law professor Greg Wallace discussed recent Second Amendment developments in an online form for the John Locke foundation will return with North Carolina journal radio in a moment. If you have freedom we got great news to share with you now. You can find the latest news, views, and research from conservative groups across North Carolina all in one place North Carolina conservative.com. It's one-stop shopping. North Carolina's freedom movement and North Carolina conservative.com. You'll find links to John Mott foundation blogs on the days news Carolina journal.com reporting and quick takes Carolina journal radio interviews TV interviews featuring CJ reporters and let foundation analysts, opinion pieces and reports on higher education.

James Dean Martin, Center for academic renewal, commentary and polling data from the scimitar's Institute and news and views from the North Carolina family policy Council.

That's right, all in one place North Carolina conservative.com that's North Carolina spelled out conservative.com North Carolina conservative.com. Try it today.

North Carolina is changing not just day-to-day but outward to our minute to minute. Even 2nd to 2nd, how can you keep up with the changes, especially the ones that affect you, your family, your home, your job, make the John Locke foundation and Carolina journal part of your social media diet on Facebook like the John Locke foundation like Carolina. Journal follow us on Twitter at John Locke in C and at Carolina journal news, insights and analysis you'll find nowhere else. Thanks to the experts at the John Locke foundation and thanks to the first-class investigative reporting of Carolina journal.

Don't wait for the morning newspaper.

Don't wait for the evening news if it's happening now it's happening here the John Locke foundation and Carolina journal. Have you covered with up to the second information like us on Facebook the John Locke foundation and Carolina journal follow us on Twitter at John Locke NC and at Carolina journal.

Who knew you could shop and invest in freedom at the same time it is true online shopping is now a great way to support the John Locke foundation just shop using the Amazon smile program and designate the John Mott foundation to receive a portion of your purchase amount that's right you shop Amazon donates money to pass the John Locke foundation, Curaçao line on to smile.amazon.com Amazon smile is the same Amazon you know same products same prices. But here's what's better is on donates 0.5% of the price of your eligible Amazon smile purchases to the John Locke foundation to try it. Be sure to designate us as the nonprofit you want to support.

It's that easy. So now not only will you enjoy what you buy. You also support freedom. Don't forget log on to smile.amazon.com today, something nice and help defend freedom, help support the John Mott foundation. Welcome back to Carolina journal radio. I mixed coca. The key decision for North Carolina voters this year involves the general assembly will Republicans keep control of the state House and Senate Democrats take over for the first time in a decade.

The John Locke foundation highlighted those questions in a recent online for consultant Brad Crone offered his thoughts. People keep asking me, do you see the way building for the Democrats of the legislative level and there may be a small rising tide right now, but I really don't see that blue wave converting from the top of the ticket legislative race.

I think the races are going to be very competitive.

We could wake up after the elections are done and you could very easily have a 2525 Senate and may be a 6159 Republican majority in the house. If the Democrats you could tell people and I believe this you can have another student situation in Houston where you get a split 6060 square, so the I don't know what the Democrats will necessarily take controlled legislature both chambers for sure, but they're going to get really, really close and that's going to make governing that much more interesting next year. Republican consultant Jim Blaine responded to Crone the Republicans right now and you told me I could walk out of the election right now. 26 Senate seats at 61 Palisades I would say sign me up. You can pick a letter Democrats pick which 61 alignment what story 61. Interestingly, 2008 there was a way across the state. The Republicans likely picked up a seat Senate in 2008 were the only website embodies the country to gain seats house guys lost two seats and I think that's an important analogy to this year because your number. What happened in 2008 you got a look back a little after 2006 2013. The massacred and worked her on big losses in the house and and that happened in 2018 and North Carolina as well. So while I think there's a good prospect for the tide to rise pretty high. Democrats currently on the same right field to some extent they've already gotten the easy picking so the stuff gets left out there may need higher water to get when they got in 2018 and 22 three Goodyear that's Republican political consultant Jim Blaine.

He and fellow consultant Brad Cohen discussed the 2020 elections impact on the North Carolina Gen. assembly recent John Locke foundation online for term before Carolina journal radio in a moment where doubling down on freedom at Carolina journal radio were proud to bring you stories that impact your life and your wallet.

And now get twice as much freedom when you also listen to our podcast headlock available on iTunes and@johnlocke.org/podcast headlock is a little bit different. It's a no holds barred discussion that challenges his softheaded ideas from the left and the right, like Carolina journal radio headlock is smart and timely but with headlock you'll hear more about the culture wars get some more humor as well. We guarantee great information and a good time – that's listen to Carolina journal radio each week and listened Locke to remember, you can listen to headlock@johnlocke.org/podcast or subscriber download each week iTunes Carolina journal radio and headlock test which you need to stay informed and stay entertained both brought to you in the name of freedom by the John lock foundation book back to Carolina journal radio I Mitch coca the John lock foundation supporting efforts to increase privacy protection of donors to nonprofit groups in North Carolina in an online forum on the topic. Doug Kellogg of Americans for tax reform offered support for the idea. There is a broad organized attack on free speech. So were talking about donor privacy and citizen privacy and that focus is very important overseeing and this started with a lecture restriction campaign restriction, some of which may make sense people more familiar with these attacks are expanded to nonprofits that have expanded to media and social media manure states that whose ethics boards thinking of New York here have attempted to regulate communication between a public relations person and member of the media where you could get on the wrong side of regulation and be accused of electioneering depending on the message or giving in the media so there is a broad attack to undermine free speech and opposition your unfortunately we see it at every level. The other state-level the federal level.

We saw the Democrats in the house try to put a bunch of anti-free speech stuff into the care Zach respond to coronavirus, so there is very much a serious campaign here in its about undermine free speech. Kellogg explains why now is an especially good time to increase privacy protection for donors.

We have a very political environment right now everything is political.

Unfortunately, that environment of everything is political fits very well with the campaign disorder turn everything every's speech every bit of speech. Some reports out there that can be considered harmful political whatever into a regulatory regime and signing this letter were very dangerous moment, that right is what is ultimately under attack in a broad sense, and that's why overseeing overseeing in terms of attacks on his organizations and you were talking that even groups that are just educational organizations that they don't even try to engage in lobby is very aggressive with broad support refocus on the nonprofit side of things. Make no mistake, this is a this is a big broad effort that's not limited to one area, a 60-year-old US Supreme Court case seems to guarantee privacy protection but that hasn't stopped groups that want to reveal donor lists. It makes the situation a little bit confusing for normal folks reading advocates like myself because we have good court decisions and bad court decisions and states keep hammering against the wall until they find a way to break through them and that's always the disadvantage of playing defense and why it's important to be proactive legislatively. The other side is just never to stop and these court setbacks not necessarily protect you for everything. But something in there some good news on that front.

I personally was working for nonprofit New York when they passed a very aggressive donor disclosure rules.

There that could require donor disclosure for 501(c) four, which is lobbying oriented organization nonprofit, but also that would risk exposing donors to educational organizations, 501(c)(3), and that those rules very aggressive rules ended up being shot down in in court that injures another one. We can try to decision the state passed a very aggressive donor disclosure law is included which is wild or criminal penalties for not reporting a $300 or more from a fundraising event so if you fail report somebody attending your dinner or something. Go to jail. Eventually you have a criminal record things ridiculous so a court shot that decision down.

But again that people who push that law, you just regroup and they're looking for a way to break through that wall and chip away at the First Amendment does not stop because the ultimate goal is to defray the First Amendment and be able to silence speech that they don't like. There has been a lot of bipartisan pushback and nonpartisan pushback on these types of rules.

So I think the optimistic view would be that we've got some good court decisions runs and fights and that there is some broad opposition that's Doug Kellogg, director of state projects and Americans for tax reform participated in a recent John Locke foundation online forum was designed to support North Carolina's effort to increase privacy protection for donors to nonprofit groups there other states to pass bills. Arizona comes to mind. Louisiana didn't do a full version of this bill that actually passed an amendment to another bill included some protection Utah.

Another very good example in a very, very similar to what were talking about with the West Virginia air Oklahoma. But one difference between Utah and West Virginia would be Utah's smaller small criminal penalty attached to releasing information not something that would ruin your life but adds a little bit more of the consequence, but yet so I think those are very good examples are other states looking at this verse were in a weird time prospecting sort of short-term state activity. I think it's really great.

North Carolina is in a position here where they have late in the year session for unfortunate reasons with coronavirus all but me of the state has some some time here to potentially pursue these reforms involves good examples for other states. A lot of them are out of session and I think will be looking at the next session figuring out what's what.

States will be good opportunities to try and cost these kind of protections and again and they can't emphasize enough how important it is to be proactive on this issue. I mean this is a great approach and also sends a message to people that their legislators are going to stand up for their rights to free speech as this wave spreads across the country that's trying to infringe on the right side and it's very important to be proactive and do whatever we can do to protect that right or salinity, other other threats.

So the more we can do to put up a shield on one area and then deal with what the other threats. There, the more we can do that the better we have seen blue states. Of course, are the most threat of these things happening in a drop of the hat. That's one of the most frustrating things in the states like New York and New Jersey is these negative efforts of popped up somewhat suddenly when a political opportunity presents itself, or somebody wants to deflect attention because bunch of legislators are going to prison being convicted of corruption and we have to do something, but separate states not not free from risk, Kellogg says there's plenty of real-world evidence that opening up nonprofit groups, donor lists can lead to negative consequences. We've seen people suffer personal retribution talking rather than threatening their kids you know unfortunately live in an era where there is an organization there.

However soft it is in groups that will threaten you physically. At this point, that's Doug Kellogg, director of state projects and Americans for tax reform. He took part in a recent online forum sponsored by the John lot foundation, the topic, increasing privacy protection for donors to nonprofit groups in North Carolina, will return with North Carolina journal radio moment really influence you either have it or you don't and at the John lot foundation. We have it, you'll find our guiding principles in many of the freedom forward reforms of the past decade here in North Carolina. So while others talk or complain or name call. We provide research solutions and hope our team analyzes the pressing issues of the day jobs, healthcare, education, and more. We look for effective ways to give you more freedom, more options, more control over your life. Our goal is to transform North Carolina into a growing, thriving economic powerhouse envy of every other state.

Our research is how policymakers make decisions that ensure you keep more of what you earn.

Expand your choice of schools for your kids.

Widen your job opportunities improve your access to doctors.

The recipe for stability and a bright future for truth for freedom for the future of North Carolina.

We are the John lot foundation. Welcome back to Carolina journal radio Donna Martinez, Gov. Roy Cooper continues to tell us that he has making his covert, 19 shut down decisions and mandates based on the science and the data by John lot foundation researchers say that the public data that is being distributed by Gov. Cooper's administration it's lacking. It's incomplete.

It's selective Jordan Roberts is the healthcare policy analyst for the John lot foundation. He is one of the team members looking at all of this data he joins me now with some questions. Some answered questions about the data related to Cova 19 in North Carolina.

Jordan welcome back to the shell, thanks to government. This is such an important discussion here that we provide context to the publicly available data because every single North Carolina's affected here and there are just huge impacts on the economic well-being.

In addition to public health here in our state.

Let's talk first about something that you've been looking at.

Sadly, we know that in nursing homes in North Carolina. What's known as congregant living facilities where folks are living together in a facility we've had an incredibly high rate of infections and deaths in North Carolina. What don't we know that we should know right so you no question that a lot of us said John Markham been asking specifically, my colleague John Sanders is no did the governor and the Sec. of Health and Human Services mandate that nursing homes and other long-term care facilities take covert positive patients from the hospital and you know what we saw in other states specifically New York and New Jersey is that they did mandate this and that's been a big topic of discussion. Now looking back and kind of reevaluating you was that the right move into that cause excess deaths and arm you will that question just hasn't been answered here North Carolina and what we do know is that about just under half of the deaths in the state have occurred. These congregant living facilities and you know it's kind of ironic.

We think about you know the way that these orders have been put into place, keeping us at home keeping businesses shut down. You think that somewhere out like this, like a presenter congregant living facility where everybody's kind of in place would be one of the easiest places to keep the virus out of so it's a question that we needs we need to know. And right now we don't know any of the information about how the Health and Human Services department in the governor's administration directed these hospitals and with our long-term care facilities.

What would happen there with the covert positive patients and like I said we know New York that was a big cause of spreading the disease and so many of those unfortunate deaths that happened and carted it living for Jordan. It was only recently just a few days ago that Dr. Mandy Cohen announced on a testing plan for people living in these facilities and the people who were working there seems months late right and this is what a lot of intermedia members been calling for this and asking you know what is the strategy what is our long-term strategy here because as we talked about before you know we kind of had a good we have a good idea of the profile of the care of their patients that get the disease and the people in congregant living facilities and nursing homes are the exact high risk category that we should be prioritizing, and yet you're right. Just last Friday when they announced that there there is can be mandatory testing before it was you know, require me now a recommended and there is one.

You know I believe in late June, one randomized testing across the whole state but now it's every two weeks. Mandatory reporting to HHS and so you is because we know there's a lot of asymptomatic spread so that you to read recurring testing keeping up with all the healthcare workers there and the patients is so important to keeping the spread down is it when it gets into these target living facilities. It just runs rampant so many unanswered questions about that whole segment of our population just been devastated not only by infections but but deaths you and the other researchers hear the lot foundation have also for a long time been looking at the issue of potential expansion of the Medicaid program in North Carolina.

Some states have expanded Medicaid under Obama care.

North Carolina's legislative leaders. The Republicans there have resisted that they have other ideas about how to give people access to insurance and care. Gov. Roy Cooper and Dr. Mandy Cohen are big-time advocates for expanding Medicaid.

It's been interesting Jordan that recently Dr. Cohen, every news conference, but at many of them started to push for Medicaid expansion.

What impact would expanding Medicaid have uncovered 19 right will you know I think what she's doing. She's fortunate. I think it's a little bit of political posturing here because this is no policy decision that the legislature has to make the decision on you know I don't.

I think that the Republican leaders have made it very clear that that's just not on the list of options for them and so here while expanding Medicaid would provide some other some uninsured folks with coverage it's just it's an inadequate and incompatible policy choice with the decisions that our state leaders are facing in terms of the budget long-term fiscal sustainability and just the simple fact that like you said, we do have other tools either piece out this week talks about a state innovation waiver, the state could apply for and you really lower the premiums in our individual market bolstering note when people don't get insurance from their jobs and go to the individual market so looking forward to so much loss of insurance from the mandatory shutdowns of people losing their jobs that that's where we should be looking to reform not expanding and making commitments to long-term spending when we have the shortfalls in so much uncertainty with how the state government operations are going to be in the future.

So I guess it's unfortunate and you know I think it distracts from the message that you know we have a serious issue in terms of health and economics and with the state budget and the Medicaid expansion is just really incompatible with all those Jordan Dr. Cohen also apparently made a decision about them.

A term it's hard to pronounce but become part of our lexicon these days during covert, 19, and that refers to the drug Hydro okay to get at transforming adjust clerk Roxie Couric when there we go. Now that has been in the news, primarily because Pres. Trump is talking a lot about that took a lot of criticism about his views of that that particular medication tells about the nexus between North Carolina's Dr. Mandy Cohen and that drug. So what was she did was, you know, you requested a rule that banned the use of this in the state and it's it's unfortunate again because you know a lot of with such a hyper polarized world. A lot of your your political parties, predicted for a lot of things and so obviously with the president promoting yet there became sort of this division over and I think that unfortunate affected a lot of the science and the way that the studies were interpreted.

I think you know from what I've seen, the results are mixed right now. At best there's been a lot of from randomized studies that show it can have an effect earlier on and maybe not so much when the disease is more set in.

But you know just here North Carolina. Duke University is doing a massive randomized study on this and down.

What again.

My colleague John Sanders is written about is that it can probably be used as a preventative tool for frontline healthcare workers and you may be right for some patients, but that's a decision between them and their doctor and just kind is blanketed, you know, prohibition of the drug. It doesn't seem to make sense when you know everyone is to be affected by the disease differently and so that may be the right decision for some people. Jordan, let me make sure I understand said Dr. Mandy Cohen actually restricted the use of that and why did do we know why or how she did that I feel with the board of pharmacy they they instituted a rule about the use of the new emergency use. So it's really took away doctors ability to say hey I think this is appropriate for this particular patient. Or maybe I don't think it's appropriate for this other patient so took away their flexibility to prescribe this tripe really fascinating.

And this is just one of the issues that the Chama foundation research team, including Jordan Roberts. Our guests have been looking at.

They are providing really context to the data that's being released and asking questions about important data that we still don't know Jordan, thanks so much for your perspective today.

Thank you all the time we have for the program this week.

Thank you for listening on behalf of my cohost Mitch Ho Chi and Donna Martinez hope you will join us again next week for another edition of Carolina Journal radio Carolina Journal radio is a program of the job on foundation to learn more about the John Locke foundation donations that support programs like Carolina Journal radio sending email to development John Locke or call 166 GLM 166554636 Carolina Journal radio is the John line foundation airline is maintaining Carolina broadcasting, Inc. all opinions expressed on this program are so clearly the station for more information about the show.

Other programs foundation John Locke toll-free at 86891 radio affiliates across Carolina Carolina Journal radio. Thank you for listening. Please join us again next week