It's 5.05 and welcome in to a Friday edition of the Carolina Journal News Hour on Charlotte's FM News Talk, 107.9 FM, WBT. I'm Nick Craig. Good morning to you. We turn the clocks back to yesterday, where Thursday the North Carolina State Board of Elections voted 3-2 along party lines to adopt new non-citizen list maintenance rules, but not before a heated exchange among public comments from board members as well as members of the public. Four rules were adopted by that 3-2 vote.
They are rules 101 through 104. We'll start with rule 101. That is what is called definitions. And it reads: the terminology was changed from presumptive non-citizen to potential non-citizen and applies only when no evidence of citizenship is available. It expands the acceptable proof of citizenship to include a derived citizenship.
An example would be through a person's parents once they become a citizen. It also requires the source of non-citizen information to be disclosed.
So changing again there some of the definitions from presumptive to potential non-citizen. Rule 102, entry of challenge or initial county review. County boards must now check their own records first for proof of citizenship. It also improves transparencies as voters are told that the board has already searched for prior documentation. It also clarifies that voters can submit evidence before any hearing, not just at the hearing itself, if they choose to do so.
It also adds some standardization in how challenges are documented, both privately and publicly. Rule 103 is dealing with the preliminary hearing. The timeline for that to take place has been adjusted with a hearing now occurring 10 to 20 business days after notification to the voter. It also allows a voter to cancel their registration if, well, they're not a citizen and they just don't want to register so that there would be no need for a hearing. It also adds procedural safeguards requiring officials to To authenticate evidence and for boards, both state and local, to consider all relevant information.
It also introduces a name matching standard with minor differences set aside, such as hyphens in names being acceptable by the board. Finally, it clarifies the purpose and only determines whether there is enough evidence to proceed at this stage. That is the preliminary hearing. And then finally, Rule 104 is the evidentiary challenge or hearing. This has the same deadline timeframes as the preliminary hearing 10 to 20 business days, but it requires a verified notice to the voter before proceeding.
If the notice isn't confirmed, the hearing then must be postponed. It also adds safeguards, including continuance if the voter hasn't received a notice and if subpoenas haven't been served. It also ensures that voters have time to resolve their citizenship records with the relevant agencies. And finally, it establishes the burden of proof and must show by quote, quote, greater weight of evidence, but more likely than not that the person is not a citizen. Those are the four rules, Rule 101 through 104, that were adopted in a 3-2 vote by the North Carolina State Board of Elections on Thursday as it deals with ongoing list maintenance and non-citizens that are registered to vote here in the state of North Carolina.
The rules were first proposed back in December of last year, with the board receiving more than 15,000 comments via its website, email, and some public comment periods and hearings that have taken place. Although there wasn't scheduled to be a public comment period. During the meeting in Raleigh yesterday, some of the individuals in attendance were given a minute to speak, like one individual, Deborah Ordzo, who said, quote, I am disappointed that we heard nothing about the analysis that was done. I have done my own analysis of those 15,000 comments. For rule one, total comments submitted for the rule, 8,500, 8,300 against, 204.
Rule two, total comments for this, 12,000, 11,750 against, and 254. I can go on with the other numbers, but I don't really believe I have to. There is nothing said or changed in the rules that indicate what kind of database we are using. It simply says government databases and other information. This is not good enough for this type of responsibility that you are placing upon a person who is probably a citizen, but we're going to label them as a non-citizen.
Democrat member Jeff Carmen told Adam Steele, who is the associate general counsel for the board, that he, quote, did an awesome job of putting a tuxedo on a pig, end quote, and added that such a small number of people in question did not. not warrant these major changes by the board. According to Carmen, he said, 41 non-citizens out of 4.8 million citizens who voted is the data that I have. And I think there's only been one person found guilty of non-citizen attempted voting. The most tragic part of all of this for me is that this new legislation, which it is not as a rule, will have a mandatory registration apply to green card holders, refugees, asylum seekers, and undocumented men that serve in the military.
And if the federal government is saying that an undocumented man can go die for our country, they're saying that he can go die for the country but not vote is very, very personal to me. Republican board member and secretary Stacey Forregers said that the effort is focused on establishing due process and clear rules, adding that much of the feedback that he has heard centers on broader philosophical questions of whether voting citizenship should in fact be verified. With Eggers telling his fellow board members, quote, Our obligation is to enforce the rules, and one of the rules is that you have to be a citizen of the United States, among other criteria, in order to be eligible to vote. What I hear from my colleagues on the other side of the fence is that we should trust in human nature and that people will simply do the right thing. That's a nice thought, but it's not something that is a reality.
This process now guarantees due process for voters and an opportunity to be heard and to have those issues considered. Our obligation is the accuracy of our voting records, and that is the first and foremost something that we have to do as far as following those procedures and making sure that we are following what the rules say that we are supposed to do. Democrat member Sabond Millen said, quote, as part of the past, the systematic alien verification for entitlements or save database, which I will note has absolutely nothing to do with the SAVE Act that is currently being debated and logjammed up in Washington, D.C., is flawed, said board member Millen, but would support another citizen comparison database. With Eggers replying that there is no other database to go by, noting that this is one that is used by many other states and is used by the federal government to determine whether somebody is eligible for federal or state entitlements, hence the acronym Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements or SAVE system. With Eggers saying, it is just amazing to me that we have a situation where the answer is simply don't verify the citizenship when we have the tools available to verify citizenship.
Board member Carmen added that the rules basically say, You have to carry your papers, to which Eggers disagreed. Carmen followed up by saying due process to one is a poll tax to another. As this meeting got very heated between the Democrats and the Republicans on the North Carolina State Board of Elections, as the vote was being taken, Carmen asked Francis DeLuca, who is the chairman of the State Board of Elections, whether he would support the measure, noting that he had served in the military alongside undocumented men who were not able to vote but served in the United States military. DeLuca responded, Yes, I do support the rule, and they have always been undocumented. With Carmen retorting, oh, so they have brought value to the country.
I'll leave it there. DeLuca fired back saying, no one ever said they didn't bring value, but we have rules. Citizens who were born here have rules, and they don't necessarily get to do everything if they don't abide by all the rules. For example, if you commit a felony, you lose your right to vote. DeLuca Eggers and Republican member Angela Hawkins all voting in the affirmative to approve these four new rules.
Board Member Millen and Carmen voting no. The rules are now in the process of being sent to the state's review commission for review. Also, the state board will update the state's voter database to upload, I should say, the state's database to the save database sometime over the next couple of weeks. That system is administered by the Department of Homeland Security as this non-citizenship list maintenance is now scheduled to take place across the state of North Carolina.
However, as I just went back and forth on some of the commentary during the board meeting, it is definitely not without controversy, a very political issue over verifying citizenship. We have seen issues just in the last couple of months here in North Carolina, an individual by the name of Dennis Bouchard, a registered voter in both Pender and New Hanover counties in southeastern North Carolina, and an individual legally in the United States as a green card holder going all the way back to the 1970s.
However, he has recently voted in presidential elections that prompted the feds to bring charges against him for, well, voting illegally in those cases. He has pled guilty that we are waiting on a sentencing hearing to be scheduled.
So there are examples of this taking place relatively recently. Within the last year here in North Carolina. We'll keep an eye on what the Rules Review Commission has to say on this, and we'll bring you the latest details right here on the Carolina Journal News Hour. You can read a copy of all four of those different rules, Rule 101 through 104, by visiting our website, CarolinaJournal.com. The story's headline: NC Board Approves Non-Citizen Voter Rules After Heated Debate.
When you manage procurement for multiple facilities, every order matters. But when it's for a hospital system, they matter even more. Granger gets it and knows there's no time for managing multiple suppliers and no room for shipping delays. That's why Granger offers millions of products in fast, dependable delivery so you can keep your facility stocked, safe, and running smoothly. Call 1-800GRanger, clickgranger.com, or just stop by.
Granger for the ones who get it done. It's 22 minutes past the hour. Welcome back to the Carolina Journal News Hour, Charlotte's FM News Talk 107.9 FM, WBT. We've got a very interesting story over at CarolinaJournal.com this morning after a new report. Democrat Governor Josh Stein is calling for the legalization of recreational marijuana.
I'm going to walk you through some of the details. An interim report released by the North Carolina Department of Health and Human Services Advisory Council on Cannabis, which was a bipartisan panel that was created by the governor, warns that the quote, hybrid market where both illegal marijuana and legal hemp-derived intoxicants are being sold side by side presents multiple risks. The risk includes a lack of consistent product testing and safety standards, difficulty for law enforcement in distinguishing legal hemp from illegal marijuana, and an increased risk of contaminants, mislabeled property, mislabeled potency, I should say, and high THC exposure. The report states directly, North Carolina's intoxicating cannabis market currently exists in a dangerous policy gap that is neither a true prohibition nor meaningful regulation. As a result, intoxicating cannabis products in North Carolina are unsafe, unregulated, and widely available.
To address these concerns, the report recommends that North Carolina and the state legislature adopt legislation establishing a legal regulated cannabis market in the Tarheel State. Stein praised the group's work and said that the report offers a path forward for lawmakers to take a look at. With the governor saying, quote, this report provides the General Assembly with guidance and makes clear that a well-regulated market, including both oversight and enforcement authority, is a safer market for our state. Our state's unregulated cannabis market today is the Wild West, and it is crying for order. Let's get this right.
Let's protect our kids and create a safe, legal, and well-regulated market for adults. Despite these recommendations, some policymakers remain cautious about moving too quickly towards legalization. At a joint legislative oversight committee hearing earlier this month, this was the Subcommittee on Health and Human Services, Senator Jim Bergen, the Republican from Harnett County, said, quote, I am very concerned that this commission on marijuana, I'm very concerned about this commission on marijuana, rural North Carolina, and I'll use Harnett County as an area. We fight it all the time. We have people in involuntary commitment who are dealing with it.
And here we are talking about spending money on rural care and trying to make people healthier. At the same time, we have a commission report that is recommending the legalization of marijuana. State Representative Reeder, the Republican from Pitt County, echoed some of those same concerns at the hearing back on April the 2nd, saying, quote, we talked about the first episode of psychosis and the mobile opioid treatment. It's remarkable that we're going to put money into this treatment, an opioid treatment, and at the same time we have a report out that is trying to legalize marijuana. We know that there is a four times higher likelihood of psychosis when young adults use marijuana.
So we're funding money for a program that we're getting ready to exacerbate. State health officials say that the scope of North Carolina's illegal cannabis market is far larger than many residents may realize. The interim report estimates that in 2022, North Carolina's illegal marijuana market had an approximate value of some $3 billion, making it the second largest among U.S. states that prohibits the sale of marijuana either for medical or recreational use, which is where North Carolina stands right now.
However, some observers remain skeptical of the accuracy and the implications of such a large estimate, questioning how reliable the underground market numbers really are and what they mean for future policy. Donald Bryson, who is the CEO and president of the John Locke Foundation, voiced his skepticism saying, quote, I think adults can make adult decisions. But when we're talking about the legalization of marijuana, we're not just talking about legalization, we're talking about normalization. We're talking about commercialization, and I'm cautious about figuring out how we can generate tax revenue out of an industry that is technically underground. Like who do you economically model that data off of?
While many states have adopted regulated medical or adult or recreational use systems, North Carolina's market has grown without a regulatory framework. North Carolina lawmakers have previously debated whether to legalize marijuana, but those efforts have repeatedly fallen short and not successfully moved out of the legislature. Previous legislation efforts in North Carolina have primarily targeted medical marijuana.
However, the Advisory Council report questions whether limiting legalization to medical use would sufficiently resolve the state's ongoing challenges. With the report reading in part, a medical-only cannabis market can create meaningful access barriers for some patients, particularly those in rural areas, individuals with limited transportation, lower-income patients, older adults, and those undergoing intensive treatment, for whom additional appointments, certifications, and travel requirements may make Access to products more difficult. In the 24 and 2024 and 2025, legislators also introduced multiple bills aimed at restricting youth access to hemp-derived THC, including proposals to set a minimum purchase age of 21, requiring retailer permits, and mandating packaging and labeling standards. Despite bipartisan interests, same situation there, none of those measures have moved through the legislative process and become law. The state debate is unfolding as federal policymakers move a significantly tightened hemp regulation, potentially reshaping the market that currently dominates North Carolina.
Congress has approved changes to federal law that would redefine hemp to include quote total THC rather than just Delta IX THC. If implemented, the changes could eliminate most hemp-derived products, impose strict THC limits on finished products, and force major adjustments for retailers and manufacturers. Those new rules from the feds are expected to take place in August of this year.
However, I'll note that the debate does continue, at least in some corners of the U.S. federal government. The Advisory Council on Cannabis's final recommendations are expected out later this year, sometime in December of 2026. And so, for those that are hoping that lawmakers will move on this and make some significant changes and move forward, they are likely going to have to wait until the legislative long session that is likely to come here in 2027. You can read more details on this preliminary report and the governor now calling for legalization of marijuana over on our website, CarolinaJournal.com.
The headline, after a panel report, Stein calls for legalizing recreation. Recreational marijuana. Um It's 5.36. Welcome back to the Carolina Journal News Hour, Charlotte's FM News Talk, 107.9 FM. WBT, I'm Nick Craig.
Good Friday morning to you. We are following an interesting report this morning out of the North Carolina Utilities Commission. A filing by Duke Energy, the state's largest electrical producer and provider, is looking to recoup some $800 million worth of energy costs that they expensed earlier this year when we had a major cold snap that affected not only North Carolina, but much of the Southeast. To walk us through some of those interesting details this morning, it's my pleasure to welcome John Sanders from the John Locke Foundation to the Carolina Journal News Hour. John, I guess the 15% rate increase that Duke Energy is seeking wasn't enough.
Cold snap earlier this year. Duke's looking to increase rates to recoup some $800 million. What do you make of this filing with the Utilities Commission?
Well, I think the filing is is kind of just normal for what you would expect uh because of The amount of coal and natural gas they had to buy. That was not anticipated and planned because this was such an extreme weather event. And so this would have happened, it would have happened any year that we had this sort of thing. And so obviously that cold snap is now said and done. Here we are heading into spring, summer months, temperatures in the 80s and 90s across North Carolina.
Now a major drought. Is there any precedent that you're familiar with with Duke having to purchase some of these commodities, whether it is coal or additional natural gas resources during a cold snap and then going to the Utilities Commission and essentially asking ratepayers to cover those costs? I mean, usually every year is kind of a test period, so that the following year they make adjustments based on their fuel costs that they faced. Um People may remember a couple of years ago that Duke cut their rates. because the the fuel costs were not as high.
As they had anticipated the previous year.
So in 2025, we saw rate cuts of a little over 6% for Duke Energy Carolinas and like 4.5% for Duke Energy Progress.
So, those don't grab the headlines quite as much as a fuel price. Poor um price increase.
So You know, and obviously, as we're continuing to watch some of these details play out, as I mentioned at the top, Duke is currently in the process of asking for about a 15% increase from the Utilities Commission. You had an article over at the John Locke Foundation, I believe it was November of last year, when they originally filed that with the Utilities Commission. And, John, I'm sure you see some of the postings on social media. People are very unhappy with their energy bills right now across the state of North Carolina. I would imagine the headline that we're tracking over at CarolinaJournal.com this morning: this $800 million recoup is only going to frustrate customers even more.
Yes, and see generally, see these are the fuel price, but generally rate increases are a lagging indicator. And I've warned for several years that rate increases were coming because of policy choices that have been made under the Cooper administration and now under the Stein administration. Our carbon plan law, especially, is going to close working power plants, which are the cheapest power providers that we have, and the Utilities Commission in concert with the Carolina's carbon plan. is has been requiring Duke to add a ton of solar. and they've started to add in some natural gas and all of that.
But Uh What, like three years ago, the public staff warned that at The rate things were going. With transmission increases, a lot of that having to do with adding a lot of solar. And the uh the additions of solar That our electricity prices were in danger of doubling and nearly doubling by 2030.
So we've been trying to warn about this. It came out last year that the interim goal of the carbon plan, which Senate Bill 266 got rid of. Was having such an outsized influence on resource generation mixed choices at the Utilities Commission that. without the Interim goal. It would save ratepayers $13 billion in additional charges by 2050.
And let me ask you a little bit about that because in this announcement that we're talking about, this filing that Duke just made this week with the Utilities Commission, Governor Josh Stein immediately took to social media, hammered Duke for requesting the $800 million recoup, and then also blasted lawmakers for moving forward with Senate Bill 266. As you note, he vetoed that legislation. It was overridden by the North Carolina General Assembly.
So, John, you and the governor seem to be at odds here. I guess it's probably not the first time that that's happened. He's claiming that it's causing power bills and will continue to cause power bills to skyrocket. But from what you're saying and from what lawmakers are saying, it's the complete opposite. Yes, and I welcome the governor's Passion for keeping prices down for ratepayers.
And I'm hoping that. He will look at the work that we're putting out at LOC and look a little bit deeper into it. For example, we've learned that the Utilities Commission has this. very favorable cost accounting that it does for solar facilities. Even though they and Duke acknowledge and the public staff acknowledge that That you cannot add solar facilities to the grid without basically adding a one-to-one.
Backup generation that you would not normally need, other than to have all of this new solar on the grid. Of natural gas backup or battery backup, generally natural gas because it's cheaper.
So Even though that's the case, When the Utilities Commission prices solar for comparison among all the different generation resources, It only prices the facility. It doesn't price the backup generation that they say they absolutely need if they're going to add solar.
So Ed. But at the same time, they put the cost of that backup generation on people's bills.
So we're making expensive resource choices, telling people it's inexpensive, and then still making them pay for the expensive choices. I'd encourage our audience this morning to go over to our website, CarolinaJournal.com, and check out this article. Because, John, we've got an image link from a report that you wrote over at the John Locke Foundation that specifically shows the morning of February the 2nd, which was right in the middle of that cold snap and winter storm that we were seeing here in North Carolina early this year. And you lay out hour by hour, starting at 4 a.m., what energy sources were being used to generate electricity across North Carolina. Coal was doing great.
Nuclear was doing great. And unfortunately, for those that are solar advocates, it wasn't until 10 o'clock in the morning that solar cracked over one gigawatt hour worth of generation, the coldest time of the day, 4, 5, 6 a.m. as people are waking up and getting their day started.
Solar and these renewable energy sources literally were putting nothing onto the grid. Yes, and the reason for choosing those times were those were the times that Duke warned its customers about. They specifically sent out a warning urging conservation from the hours of four AM to ten a.m.
So I thought, well, let's see who's giving us power during those emergency times. And at the same time, the utility got. Got a waiver from the Department of Energy to exceed their emissions, which allowed them to add more coal and natural gas into the mix. And obviously, we saw that play out, and we did not have a similar situation to the blackout we saw back at, I believe it was Christmas of right around Christmas of 2022 here in North Carolina. John, I know that you're going to be keeping an eye on what happens with this request out now in with the North Carolina Utilities Commission.
We'll keep you up to date over on our website, CarolinaJournal.com. We appreciate the insight and information this morning. John Sanders from the John Locke Foundation joins us on the Carolina Journal News Hour. Yeah. Good morning again.
It's 551. Welcome back to the Carolina Journal News Hour, Charlotte's FM News Talk, 107.9 FM, WBT, the United States recorded another record low birth rate in 2025. This is according to new data from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, that is the CDC, that continues a decades-long demographic decline with implications for the economy and public education. The provisional numbers of births in the United States last year was just over 3.6 million, a 1% decline from 2024.
The general fertility rate fell to 53.1 births per 1,000 females aged 15 to 44, also down 1% from the prior year and the lowest rate on record. The fertility rate has now dropped by a whopping 23% since 2007 over the last 19 years. The most recent state level data from 2023 does, in effect, put North Carolina slightly above the national rate at 56.0 births per 1,000 females, again, aged 15 to 44, according to the CDC's National Center for Health Statistics, with North Carolina's teen birth rate standing at 14.8 per 1,000 females aged 15 to 19. Nationally, the teen birth rate has fallen sharply in 2025 to 11.7 per 1,000, which is a 7% drop from 2024, which was another record low according to that CDC data. The teen rate has also declined a whopping 72% since 2007 and 81% from where its peak was back in 1991.
The demographic changes are shifting both the global and the North Carolina landscape. Report analyzed by the Carolina Journal found that aging societies and falling birth rates could cost the world's economy trillions of dollars in lost productivity and growth.
Meanwhile, the average age in North Carolina has reached nearly 40 years old, according to the U.S. Census Bureau and its estimates from 2023, with the state currently having only 76 workers for every 100 open jobs, according to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. Joseph Harris, a fiscal policy analyst at the John Locke Foundation, pointed out that even though North Carolina has a shortage of workers, it is far less severe than other states are facing, saying, quote, the North Carolina rate actually reflects a stronger labor market with abundant opportunities for residents. By contrast, states like California have far more workers than available jobs, which works out to about 163 workers for every job.
Every 100 openings in California, meaning that many job seekers are competing for limited opportunities. North Carolina's 65 and older population is projected to double to more than 2.7 million by 2040.
So, over the little more than a decade or so from now, according to data from the North Carolina Office of State Budget and Management, in a much shorter timeframe, by 2031, there will be more North Carolinians over the age of 64 than under the age of 18. The impacts extend beyond the economy to education as well. With birth rates peaking in the United States in 2007, 2025 was the highest year for high school graduates nationally. Moving forward, North Carolina is projected to see minimal growth in graduates from 122,000 in 2025 to 123,000.
So, only adding 1,000 new high school graduates again. Year over year by 2041, as there are fewer children born and enrolling in lower grades. Data from the North Carolina Department of Public Instruction shows that 105 of the state's 115 school districts did experience enrollment declines in the fall compared to the previous school year. Total public school enrollment has dropped by 5.4% or more than 76,000 students since 2019. At the same time, state spending on public education has continued to climb.
A Carolina Journal analysis found that total state funding for public education rose to $12.6 billion in the fiscal year 24-25 to $12.75 billion in the 25-26 fiscal year, even as enrollment fell by roughly 4,700 students. On a pure-pupil basis, state spending has climbed nearly 27% over seven years from an estimated $6,500 per student in the 2018-2019 school year to now more than 8,300. in the 25-26 school year. The 2025 U.S. birth rate is a provisional based on a 99.95% birth record processing through February of 2026 and is part of the CDC's rapid release system for public health information.
It's a very interesting report and some very interesting long-term impacts, not only on North Carolina's economy, the global economy, also talking about the education, the public education system here in North Carolina and across the rest of the country as well. You can read some more details on this report by visiting our website, CarolinaJournal.com. We've got the story headline: NC faces demographic shift as U.S. birth rate hits record low. That's going to do it for a Friday edition of the Carolina Journal News Hour.
WBT News is next, followed by Good Morning BT. We're back with you Monday morning, 5 to 6, right here on Charlotte's FM News Talk, 107.9 FM, WBT.
