It's 5.05 and welcome in to a Wednesday edition of the Carolina Journal News Hour, News Talk 1110-993 WBT. I'm Nick Craig. Good morning to you. The Democrat National Committee, the DNC, is threatening to take legal action against the North Carolina State Board of Elections if it removes 98,000 registered voters from voter rolls due to missing information. We have to go back to June 24th when the new state board of elections, the control of that board, or the power of that board recently just changed from Democrat to Republican at that late June meeting, the board unanimously approved a three-part plan to collect missing identification numbers of 195,000 voters on the rolls across the state.
The plan would involve obtaining driver's license numbers or the last four digits of Social Security number for registered North Carolina voters who lack either in their voter record. The missing information has been a voter registration requirement of the federal Help American Vote Act, or HAVA, which took effect back in 2004. The U.S. Department of Justice filed a lawsuit against the state and the North Carolina State Board of Elections in May regarding that missing information. State election officials said that they hope that the plan will resolve the lawsuit and others and bring the state into compliance with recent North Carolina Court of Appeals orders.
Starting this month, the State Board will send mail to approximately 98,000 registered voters who registered after 2004 when HAVA went into effect, whose records lack either a full driver's license number or the last four digits of a Social Security number, and who have not otherwise complied with HAVA. These voters will vote provisionally until they provide the information. A second piece of mail will go out this summer to approximately 97,000 North Carolinian voters who have complied with HAVA, but for whom election officials do not have a driver's license number or the last four of a social security number on the current registration record. This list includes voters who initially provided that information, but it did not validate and subsequently complied with the law by providing an alternate form of ID called a HAVA ID when voting. These voters will continue to vote with regular ballots.
After the rest of the plan is completed, the State Board will send one more reminder to those who still need to provide required information. That is their three step plan.
Well, a Washington, D.C. law firm by the name of Wilmer Hale sent a letter on behalf of the DNC to the North Carolina State Board on July the 11th. They say that the board is violating the National Voter Registration Act, or NVRA, with its plan to remove approximately 98,000 registrants from the official list of eligible voters. The letter reads in part. By requiring voters to cast provisional ballots that may not be counted, the plan effectively removes registrants from the official list of eligible voters.
These voters may therefore be prevented from casting effective ballots in local elections held this fall. It further states section 8A3 of NVRA prohibits a state from removing the name of a registrant from the official list of eligible voters unless the removal occurs one at the registrant's request, two, because of a criminal conviction or mental capacity, three, due to the death of the registrant, or four, based on the registrant's change in residence. Attorney Sam Waxman continued to say that the state plan will, quote, harm the DNC and its members and force the Democrat National Committee to use funds that would have been spent on voter outreach and disenfranchises members of the Democrat Party who attempt to update registration records during the voting process when they submit driver's license numbers or partial social security numbers that fail to match the administrative records. Legal action, he states, will be taken if the violations aren't corrected by October the 9th.
However, Pat Gannon, the spokesperson for the North Carolina State Board of Elections, says, quote, the executive director's plan to collect missing registration information from voters was unanimously approved by the State Board of Election at its June 24th meeting. We believe that it fully complies with state and federal law, including the National Voter Registration Act. And we expect it will also receive approval from the United States Department of Justice. Important to note, the comment from Pat Gannon, the state board of elections is currently a 3-2 Republican-Democrat makeup, and the board did unanimously approve that, meaning it was a bipartisan decision. The remaining part of the plan will have the 100 County Board of Elections reviewing their internal records in the voter registration database through the month of August for, quote, active voters who may still have missing ID numbers and correct records where the voter provided the information, but it was not entered or potentially not entered correctly by the county board.
In future elections, in person voters who lack the required information in the voter registration database will have to vote with a provisional ballot, which will count as long as the voter provides that required information. The State Board of Elections is also creating a flag to appear on these voters' records in either an electronic or paper poll book that is used at voting sites to alert poll workers that these voters must vote provisionally with a provisional ballot and provide the missing information for their ballot to be accepted. The state Supreme Court race involving Republican candidate Jefferson Griffin and Democrat candidate Allison Riggs also highlighted some issues with voter ID as Griffin contested more than 65,000 ballots from November's general election. Griffin would then go on to concede in May and Riggs would go on to win that election. A federal trial involving challenges to North Carolina's congressional and legislative election maps also continues to show the Tar Hill State's importance in elections.
And a trial in Winston-Salem, which started on June the 16th, should have a final decision sometime in August. Elections, of course, do continue to be a major topic across the state of North Carolina. We will continue to track this letter. From this law firm on behalf of the Democrat National Committee. Again, they state that they will take legal action against the state by October the 9th.
If things aren't corrected, we will continue to track details over on our website, CarolinaJournal.com, and of course, right here on the Carolina Journal NewsHour. As key GOP and Democratic candidates make final decisions about entering North Carolina's open 2026 U.S. Senate race, a new survey conducted by American Majority Action reveals a pathway for conservative victories in North Carolina through targeted voter education, outreach, and early voting mobilization. The poll specifically surveyed right-of-center voters across the state. that voted in one or both of the last two presidential elections, that would be 2020 and 2024, but have no recent history of voting in midterm elections.
This is a group that American Majority Action says must be mobilized en masse for conservatives and Republicans to win the United States Senate race coming up in North Carolina next year. Ryan Bruhl, the president of SPRY Strategies, which conducted the research on behalf of American majority, said, quote, conservatives have a historic opportunity to feed and grow the new multi-generational, diverse working class coalition that propelled them to victory in 2024. This required reimagining of voter outreach focuses on successes of the America First agenda, combined with dedicated, consistent early voting efforts. According to the North Carolina off-year primary survey, which was conducted in the middle part of June, among 500 GOP voters, 82% of the lower-propensity Trump-aligned voters approve if the job of Trump is doing, including 70% who say they strongly approve. The poll conducted through online, mobile and live landline interviews had a margin of error of about 4.6%.
Support for the Republican-controlled Congress also remained very high with this group, a 78% approval of the current GOP majorities, compared to just 21 who disapproved. In the poll, early voting emerged as a major theme among respondents, reflecting changes that helped Republicans outperform Democrats in North Carolina in last year's election. The survey shows that 73% of low-propensity conservatives who plan to vote in 2026 intend to vote early, with 68 preferring in-person early voting and 5% opting for mail-in ballots. This mirrors GOP turnout strategies from 2024, when conservative campaigns made significant gains by investing in early voting outreach. Respondents also strongly acknowledged early voting in the 2024 election.
79% said it was important, including 50% who said it was very important. And 78% believed that it is important for Republicans and Trump-aligned voters to embrace early voting in 2026, with 52% calling it, quote, extremely important. We've got a lot more details on this poll. You can read all of it, Alth Crosstabs, and some of the other insights over on our website this morning, CarolinaJournal.com, the headline ahead of key U.S. Senate announcement: new poll shows conservatives' path to victory.
Again, you can read those details at CarolinaJournal.com. It's 22 minutes past the hour. Welcome back to the Carolina Journal News Hour, News Talk 1110-993 WBT. Earlier this week, in North Carolina, Attorney General Jeff Jackson joined 24 other mainly Democrat-run states in suing the federal government to prevent it from freezing funds for North Carolina's schools and educators. He joined the lawsuit filed in Rhode Island by the Attorney Generals of Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, and Wisconsin, as well as the governors of Pennsylvania and Kentucky.
In a press release, he said that the schools in the Tarheel State will lose more than $165 million in funding. That's the state's share of $6.8 billion in nationwide federal funding, as well as about 1,000 educators across the state that will likely lose their jobs as a ramification of these cuts. Those cuts make up nearly 10% of all of the state's federal education funding. Jackson saying, public schools across North Carolina, especially in rural areas, need this money to keep teachers in the classroom and keep kids safe while they learn. It's unlawful and unconstitutional for the Department of Education to withhold money that Congress has appropriated.
I'm going to court to get this money for our students, our schools, and North Carolina families. Democrat Governor Josh Stein also reacted to the news, saying, Today, North Carolina is taking action to unfreeze funding for North Carolina public schools that was appropriated by Congress. Without these funds, nearly 1,000 teachers will have their jobs taken from them. The money also provides after-school programs, supports children learning English, and helps adults learn how to read. If the grants are eliminated, Wake County schools will stand to lose more than $8 million.
The Charlotte Mecklenburg School System, CMS, are estimated to lose over $12 million, and Western North Carolina schools will lose the most funding per pupil. The Wake County School System instituted a hiring freeze last week in anticipation of the funding freeze and CMS, the school board there, sent a letter to the Department of Education asking officials to reverse their decision. Nine of the ten school districts losing the most money per state are in rural North Carolina. Many of the counties devastated by Hurricane Helene are facing a cut of roughly eighteen million dollars. According to Mo Green, the superintendent of public instruction, he says: while the North Carolina Department of Instruction respects the federal administration's right to review programs, I must emphasize that our legal obligations are to serve those students and those remain unchanged.
And the timing of this creates significant and unnecessary challenges for schools, community organizations, and most importantly, the children who depend on these services. I support efforts, including this nationwide lawsuit, to resolve this situation quickly and ensure that North Carolina students receive the support that they need and deserve and that our federal government agreed to provide them. In addition to school budgets and teacher salaries, the grants go towards before and after school programs for students, community learning centers, teacher development programs, and more. The funds were supposed to be released by the federal government on July 1st, but the Department of Education suspended those on June the 30th. Brian Balfour, the Vice President of Research for the John Locke Foundation, said North Carolina public schools spend $3 billion in funds from the federal government per year.
The Trump administration's freeze would represent about 5.6% of federal funding, and it is targeted to specific programs and may prove to be a temporary hold on funds rather than a permanent reduction.
Furthermore, total spending on North Carolina public schools was $18 billion last year, so the $169 million being frozen is less than 1% of total spending. Attorney General Jeff Jackson also noted that the loss of nearly 1,000 teaching positions could have a major impact on school districts throughout North Carolina with ongoing teacher shortages, stating that from the 23-24 school year, data shows almost 9,000 teachers left the profession in the state. Jackson reporting that. The NCGOP Communication Director Matt Mercer said in a press release earlier this week: Multiple North Carolina cities have seen homicide rates increase in 2025, and some NC sheriffs still refuse to cooperate with ICE.
However, Jeff Jackson's top priority is joining with other radically left-wing attorney generals to spend taxpayer money on a lawsuit against President Trump so he can raise money for his next political act opportunity. This lawsuit came on the same day that the United States Supreme Court announced that it would allow the Trump administration to fire over 1,000 Department of Education employees, paving the way for President Trump to dismantle the department. That is something that the president campaigned on and has talked about since he has been in the Oval Office. The High Court's decision on McMahon versus the state of New York was issued in a 6-3 party line decision. This funding discussion continues to be a pretty major topic across the state of North Carolina.
We will track this lawsuit's progress in the coming weeks and months. And if any changes do take place at the Department of Education at the federal level, we'll of course pass it along to you right here on the Carolina Journal News Hour and on our website, CarolinaJournal.com. If you work in quality control at a candy factory, you know strict safety regulations come with the job. It's why you partner with Granger. Granger helps you find the high quality and compliant products your business needs to inspect, detect, and help correct issues.
And the sweetest part is, everyone gets a product that's as safe to eat as it is delicious. Call 1-800GRANGER, clickgranger.com or just stop by. Granger for the ones who get it done. It's 5:36. Welcome back to the Carolina Journal News Hour, News Talk 11:10-993 WBT.
The Democrat National Committee is threatening legal action against the North Carolina State Board of Elections over a plan to address missing voter ID information. A little backstory here: the state board unanimously approved a plan on June the 24th to collect missing driver's license numbers or social security numbers for about 195,000 registered voters across the state. That is a requirement under the federal Help America Vote Act. About 98,000 of those voters who registered after HAVA took effect all the way back in 2004 but still lack ID data will be receiving mail from the state board and will be required to vote provisionally unless they provide the required information. The DNC represented by law firm Wilmer-Hale argues that the plan violates the National Voter Registration Act by effectively removing eligible voters.
They warn it may disenfranchise Democrat voters and divert party resources and have demanded changes by October the 9th or they are threatening legal action against the state. The North Carolina State Board of Elections maintains that the plan complies with both state and federal law and is aimed at resolving an existing Department of Justice lawsuit and a North Carolina court order. Local county board of elections in all 100 counties will also continue reviewing records through the month of August, and voters flagged as missing ID information will need to vote provisionally in future elections until they comply with that have a requirement through the Board of Elections. The controversy arises amid ongoing legal challenges over redistricting and voter ID laws in North Carolina, including a recent state Supreme Court race dispute and a federal trial over congressional maps. We've got a lot more details on this story.
It is set to be an interesting one playing out between. The Democrat National Committee and now the Republican-led North Carolina State Board of Elections. Of course, the Department of Justice involved as well. A lot of different parties pulling this in different directions. We'll keep an eye on it right here on the Carolina Journal News Hour and on our website, CarolinaJournal.com, where it's now 5:38, News Talk 1110, 993, WBT.
There's been a lot of discussion over the last couple of weeks about Medicaid, of course, up at the federal level with Trump's One Big Beautiful Bill here in North Carolina with some focus on Medicaid expansion and the future of that program.
However, this morning we turned to the North Carolina Department of Health and Human Services and an audit by state auditor Dave Bullock about North Carolina's Medicaid plan to walk us through those details. Teresa Opaca, CarolinaJournal.com, joins us on the news hour. Teresa, a lot of Medicaid news over the last couple of weeks. What are you learning? Sure, good morning, Nick.
Thanks for having me.
So, yeah, there was this audit released late last week by Auditor Bollock. He said that there were many factors in this audit that pointed to a threat to patients' safety. Among them, how the DHHS allowed. physicians and providers with license limitations, suspensions or other credential issues to remain in the program and still give people treatment. We do break some of that down in the article, but that was among the huge issues that this audit did point out.
Yeah, I mean, you look at that, I mean, the headline is failure to remove problematic providers, which inherently, Teresa, when you're talking about medical coverage, especially that that is almost exclusively or 100% exclusively funded by taxpayers across the United States, that's a big-time problem if you've got individuals that are not supposed to be dealing with certain things, not only providing the service, maybe not to par, but then also billing the state or federal government for that as well. Right, and getting paid for it. And there's numerous instances that they have in this report. There was one doctor I remember reading about, he needed a chaperone with him for previous sexual misconduct, if you will. I mean, it was some pretty big stuff that was in this.
And the reason why they did this audit is they wanted to follow up on a 2021 audit because there were similar issues back then with the Health Department, North Carolina, conducting the same. same practices, letting letting these doctors and physicians, you know, practice or or get paid reimbursed from the Medicaid program when they shouldn't have been. And there was maybe one item I believe was fixed, but Majority of them weren't. And there were all different reasons given. DHHS said, Well, there was, you know, no law requiring it for this, or, you know, we didn't deem this.
So it's like Auditor Bola shot back, well, no, that's not right. And you know, it just wanted to, they wanted to go through all of this, which I certainly don't blame them because you want the best care possible when you are going to a doctor. You know, Teresa, I'm glad you bring up this previous 2021 audit. You and I have discussed a variety of audits of a variety of state agencies over the last year or so. This is unfortunately a common thread.
It seems regardless of what entity we're talking about, these audits take place sometimes every year, every couple of years. And oftentimes, we come back to the same drawing board every time. It's the same list of issues over and over again. That, I guess, is not an exception here with the audit of Medicaid. No, absolutely.
You're right. I mean, we've had those issues come up in audits. It seems like year after year after year. I don't know if the General Assembly could get involved in this at this point, like they did with NCORE, with the hurricane relief out in eastern North Carolina, where if some agency is not doing what they're supposed to be doing, maybe have a hearing on it. That's a possibility.
Again, I don't know. But yeah, you're right. It seems like there's always the same issues with the same departments year after year or every couple of years when they do do these audits.
So I don't know what thinking is on the departments. Their part, but you think they would really, if they pointed this out in an audit, you'd want to fix it.
Well, before we get into some more of the details, I just want to make this last point. I mean, I have a lot of respect for what goes on in the state auditor's office. I think they do a lot of work. But Teresa, you're eventually getting towards diminishing returns if you're paying state employees to do audits every year and find the same results every time. It's almost a waste of that department's time if the agency truly is not going to make any changes and just let the same things come out every year.
Oh yes, yes, absolutely. Agree with you. You know, they could be using that time for other things that need to shed light on something that's going in wrong in the state that's totally different from the same old, same old with all the same departments every year. Like I said, maybe that you need to have a hearing at this point. I'm not sure that that could happen.
But yeah, it is a waste of the time of the employees of the auditor's office and taxpayer money, if you will. Looking at some of the other issues, we've got limitations. Those are ignored. We touched a little bit on that. Incomplete credential checks, unverified ownership of information.
These are some pretty serious things that are in this report. You read through the entire thing, and our audience can do so over at Carolinajournal.com. These are serious issues, correct? Oh, absolutely correct. I mean, you know, it's just another one, too.
Briefly, they didn't fully implement recommendations to strengthen provider credential verification.
So, they didn't actually go through the whole process of verifying credentials. And I think some of that was included for pharmacy. Uh Um Related positions, and I think they believe that DHH has said, well, we required them. We thought that they were going to self-report. I believe that's what one of the answers was given.
So, yeah, it just, they're all very serious issues. There's nothing that's really minor in this report. As we look at a typical audit and ones like we've talked about in the past, typically the auditor, in this case, Dave Bollick, gives some recommendations to the entity that he's conducting it on. Do you have an overview of what some of those look like? Sure.
So for that last one that I mentioned, they obviously say they should verify the providers to possess the certifications that they should have. Other recommendations that they have is Just to make sure everything is being followed through on and being correct. Policies and procedures for, say, continued enrollment of providers with license limitations should describe those types of limitations that the division finds acceptable. And obviously, the policy should also require adequate documentation to support those decisions to either enroll or deny enrollment.
So they're all really, really good recommendations. We have a full listing in the article on our website. But yeah, definitely nothing to sneeze at at this report. Teresa, we appreciate the update. Teresa Opeka from the Carolina Journal joins us on the Carolina Journal News Hour.
Yeah. Good morning again. It's 551. Welcome back to the Carolina Journal News Hour, News Talk 1110-993 WBT. A recent study by the American Enterprise Institute found that building light touch density housing does not appear to affect single-family home values.
The study was conducted in just two cities across the United States, Charlotte and Seattle. These cities were chosen because of the legality of light touch density infill, as well as the growth of these cities in the past 25 years, making them ideal cities to study. Light touch density infill housing is the ability to build multiple units, a series of townhomes, or an accessory dwelling unit, also known as an ADU, on a single parcel of land. Supporters argue that infill creates less expensive units due to their typical size. It also allows for more use of a piece of land.
therefore lowering the overall rental rate. Opponents, however, suggest that infill will lower the value of homes in the surrounding area and affect the culture and the aesthetic of the community. Researchers compared property values in zones where only single-family detached homes were allowed and in zones where light touch density infill were taking place. They studied home price appreciation in the two areas from the time the zoning regulations were implemented in their respective cities. It was found in the Seattle portion of the study that the difference in home price appreciations were not notable between the two zones until 2020.
The researchers suspect that this is due to the COVID-19 pandemic shifting consumer preferences towards larger homes due to more jobs working from home and more folks working remotely. In Charlotte, researchers also found no notable difference in home price appreciation between zones for only single family detached homes and light touch density infill zones. In fact, in the aftermath of the 2008 financial crisis and COVID-19, Light touch density areas actually performed a little bit better than single-family detached homes in certain areas. Other studies on the topic indicate similar findings, with some noting reduced rent rates within neighborhoods incorporating light touch density housing. According to longtime real estate broker Deborah Magnum, she said, I see this adding, I see that adding ADUs or duplexes doesn't hurt home values.
In fact, neighborhoods with more walkable options often become even more sought after. Sure, some people worry about parking or change, but the market rarely reflects those fears. Magnum continued by saying, opposition can stem more from perception and less from actual market trends. At the end of the day, it really comes down to personal preference.
Some folks want wide open yards. Others want to walk out their front door, grab coffee without getting into their car. Gentle density gives us the flexibility to have both. We've got more on this study, again, conducted in both Charlotte and Seattle. You can read those details this morning over on our website, CarolinaJournal.com.
The headline, Charlotte Focus Study, Adding Density Doesn't Necessarily Hurt Home Values. As we To round out the program this morning, I'd like to brag on my colleagues over at CarolinaJournal.com as the Carolina Journal took home an impressive haul in the 2025 North Carolina Press Association Awards, earning 15 accolades across multiple categories for its excellence in investigative journalism, editorial commentary, multimedia storytelling, and innovative digital strategies. The awards are judged by members of the Press Association in other states, with the Nebraska Press Association judging North Carolina's entries this year. The selection reflects Carolina Journal's continued leadership in watchdog journalism and its evolving digital strategy. The honors were announced in advance of the Press Association's annual convention, which is scheduled for September 18th of this year.
Carolina Journal journalists earned five first place, eight second place, and two third place awards. The publication's performance underscores both its journalistic depth and its capacity for engaging, impactful storytelling across multiple platforms. Notably, among the honors, Carolina Journal earned first and second place in investigative reporting and was recognized for the mini-documentary Come Hell or Helene and won the Duka University Award for exceptional coverage of higher education. The Carolina Journal team will join industry colleagues at the Press Association's annual convention for a week of informational workshops and celebration of the new industry in North Carolina. These accolades solidify its role as one of North Carolina's leading sources of principled investigative journalism, commitment to transparency, freedom, and government accounting.
Yeah. The North Carolina Press Association is a nonprofit organization funded all the way back in 1873 in Goldsboro by a group of newspaper editors.
So, I'd like to tip my hat and say congratulations to all of the great folks over at CarolinaJournal.com. Many of them you welcome into your cars or homes each and every morning right here on the Carolina Journal News Hour. We've got a full list of all of the awards that we are taking home from the NCPA over on our website, CarolinaJournal.com.
Well, that's going to do it for a Wednesday edition of the Carolina Journal News Hour. WBT News is next, followed by Good Morning, BT. We're back with you tomorrow morning, 5 to 6, right here on News Talk 1110 and 99.3 WBT.
