It's 505 and welcome in to a Thursday 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 are going to be keeping a very close eye on the General Assembly for the weeks to come, as we brought you yesterday morning here on the program, a framework budget deal between the North Carolina House and Senate, meaning that we are going to see a lot of movement, both in committees dealing with the spending and finance, as well as a lot of other major issues in the weeks to come. We start off in the North Carolina Senate this morning, where Senate Republicans filed legislation that would ask North Carolina voters to lower the state's constitutional income tax rate from where it is at 7% right now to just 3.5% coming up later on this year in 2026.
State Senators Lisa Barnes, the Republican from Nash County, Michael Lee, the Republican from New Hanover, and Benton Sawyery, the Republican from Johnston County, filed Senate Bill 1080 on Wednesday, which is called Lower Taxes for All NC, which would be placed on the proposed constitutional amendment on the November 2026 general election ballot. The measure would further limit the state's maximum income tax rate as voters previously approved a 2018 amendment to lower that cap from 10% to 7% just back in 2018. Republican legislative leaders have made income tax reduction a central part of their fiscal policy since taking control of the North Carolina General Assembly winning elections in 2010 being sworn in in early 2011. With North Carolina's personal income tax rate once near 8%, it is now at 3.99%. The state's flat income tax rate is scheduled to fall to 3.49% in 2027 under this proposed budget deal.
The proposed constitutional amendment is part of the state budget framework agreement announced earlier this week by Senate Leader Phil Berger, the Republican from Rockingham County, and House Speaker Dustin Hall, the Republican from Caldwell. Senator Michael Lee said in a statement. There is no question that North Carolina has one of the strongest, fastest-growing economies in the country, and that is a direct result of Republican-led fiscal policies. A critical pillar of that success has been consistently lowering taxes and putting money back into the pockets of hardworking North Carolinians. When it comes to setting the maximum rate, the people of our state deserve to have a say.
Senator Sawyer said that the message would give taxpayers more long-term certainty, saying in part, the people of North Carolina elected a Republican majority for a litany of reasons, but one of those key reasons is our fiscal responsibility. Republicans in the General Assembly have gone to the mat to keep your tax rates in check, and reducing the tax cap gives citizens certainty that they will not be taken advantage of. Final, a quote from lawmaker, Senator Barnes said that the amendment would help prevent future. tax increases, noting in part that Republican legislators are committed to lowering the tax burden for all North Carolinians. Saying in part, we have seen the challenges created by past tax and spend policies and refuse to let our state go back to that era.
This constitutional amendment provides our citizens the opportunity to have a greater say in how the tax rates are set. Joseph Harris, a fiscal policy analyst over at the John Locke Foundation, said that the proposal would serve as a long-term taxpayer protection rather than an immediate tax cut. With Harris saying in part, lowering North Carolina's constitutional income tax cap from 7 to 3.5% would be a major taxpayer protection. It would set a stronger constitutional guardrail and give voters a choice on whether state income tax rates should be allowed to rise above 3.5%. That kind of long-term statement.
Stability matters for families, workers, and businesses making decisions in North Carolina. The amendment was foreshadowed Tuesday when Senate Leader Phil Berger and House Speaker Destin Hall announced a state budget framework that did include plans for additional tax reliefs. The constitutional amendment must first receive approval from three-fifths of both chambers of the North Carolina General Assembly. This is not something that deals with a simple majority. Once approved by lawmakers, and it does not go to the governor either, the income tax amendment would then be placed on the November 2026 ballot.
We do not exactly know what the verbiage of that will look like. I'm sure that will be rolled out from lawmakers in the coming days and weeks. We'll keep our eyes on those details right here on the Carolina Journal News Hour. In some other statewide news this morning, Orange and Pitt counties are the least affordable counties in the state for energy, according to the brand new John Locke Foundation. Foundation's Energy Poverty Index, known as EPI, which ranks all 100 counties and how much more people in poverty pay for energy bills related to the benchmark.
According to John Sanders, who is the director of the Center for Food, Power, and Life at the John Locke Foundation, he says in recent months, rising energy costs, especially including electricity rates, have captured headlines and policymakers. It's good that the problem is finally getting through to our elected officials, but the bad news is that the electricity rate changes. Lag policy changes.
So, with the exception of the fuel rate adjustments, the problems have been evident as of late, and they unfortunately were set in motion years ago. This county-by-county energy index measures how much households living in poverty spend on electricity bills relative to the widely accepted affordable energy benchmark of no more than 6.5% of household expenditures that should be devoted to energy costs, according to John Sanders. Two counties rankings are generally utilizing this metric: one for households served by the state, and three investors-owned utilities, and another for households served by municipal utilities or electric membership cooperatives. You see, some of these co-ops across the state. According to the investor-owned map, Pitt County has an average annual cost of $1,608.
a median household income of $11,615. Orange County ranks number three on the investors map with an average annual cost of $1,478 and a median poverty income of $10,973. On the map reflecting municipalities and co-ops, Orange County had an average yearly cost of more than $1,800 and Pitt County ranks number 13th on the same map with the average yearly cost of over $1,600. Under the investor-owned map, Union County ranks as the most affordable at 97th as no data is available for Watauga, Ash, and Allegheny counties. Union County has an average annual cost of just $1,341 with a median poverty income of $16,000.
The map for municipalities and co-ops ranks Graham County as the most affordable at 95, with no data being available for Swain, Henderson, Clay, New Hanover, and Terrell counties, with the average annual cost in Graham County being less than $1,000, $938 on average, with that median of poverty income at $12,775. John Sanders said, Energy is an inescapable feature of today's life. When the cost of energy goes up, people cannot simply shift to something else. For low-income households, especially, they face tough choices, including lowering how much they're able to pay towards credit cards. And the policymakers should be more cognizant of how important it is to keep energy costs low.
So they should limit policy interventions that require utilities to make expensive changes and resource choices that raise rates. According to the latest data from the household debt report, this is a report from Wallet Hub. More than half of Americans admit that their households are struggling with debt, with upwards of 56% saying rising energy prices are one of the factors driving them towards financial hardships. Two out of five individuals express their debt to increase, expected rather, their debt to increase over the next decade. 12 months.
In addition to that, 40% say that they believe that the financial debt is impacting health, and 67% say that they believe that better budgeting would solve debt problems. Yet, one in five Americans say that they were willing to sacrifice fund to get out of debt, which probably tells you the much larger story as we're not going to and don't have the time to get into a full-on fiscal discussion this morning. But according to the Wallet Hub study, just one in five Americans are willing to sacrifice fund to get out of debt. That unfortunately kind of tells you much of the story. At the end of 2025, total household debt was $18.78 trillion, $754 billion below the all-time high, with average household debts being around $155,000 in 2025.
Household debt rose by $257 billion. That is up 810% since 2024. We'll be keeping our eye on. On all of this, especially as lawmakers continue to discuss energy and electricity prices here in North Carolina. You can read more on this story over on our website, CarolinaJournal.com.
Look for the story with the headline: Pitt Orange Counties have least affordable energy prices in North Carolina. It's 21 minutes past the hour. Welcome back to the Carolina Journal News Hour, Charlotte's FM News Talk, 107.9 FM, WBT. We are, of course, keeping a very close eye on midterm elections, some major races here in North Carolina, including our congressional races, and, of course, the United States Senate race that we're keeping a close eye on as well. That race between former Democrat governor Roy Cooper and former head of the RNC Michael Watley.
However, on the congressional side, a new race from the University of Virginia's Center for Politics has shifted North Carolina's 11th congressional district to lean Republican from likely Republican, putting U.S. Representative Chuck Edwards, the Republican incumbent out in the western half of the state, the mountain district here in North Carolina, in potentially a vulnerable position as he faces Democrat challenger Jamie Ager this. Fall. The Center for Politics is not alone in shifting its rating of North Carolina 11 further away from Republicans, probably not accurate to say towards Democrats. Last fall, the Cook Report also updated its ratings from strong Republican to likely Republicans still staying in that camp.
However, not necessarily moving in the best direction if you are Chuck Edwards or Republicans in that district. Andy Jackson, the director of the Civitas Center for Public Integrity at the John Locke Foundation, told the Carolina Journal that after redistricting of congressional districts in the eastern part of the state, the 11th became North Carolina's most competitive congressional district. With Jackson arguing, National Democrat Party groups made it one of their main targets and nominated local political royalty, Jamie Ager. Ager has outraced Chuck Edwards by more than two to one. In addition, the midterm political environment, as we know, favors Democrats.
A spokesperson for Congressman Chuck Edwards and Paul Shoemaker said, given that Republicans control the White House, the dynamics of the 2026 election have shifted overall.
However, voters have not shifted their ideological liens, and this district remains conservative, which Chuck Edwards will win in November. To make matters worse for Republicans, the House Ethics Committee is currently investigating allegations of an inappropriate relationship with a staff member who would be described and is described as a female subordinate. That is according to Time magazine. The inquiry is in its early stages, but the accusations say that the relationship caused a toxic environment in the office and would, in fact, have violated House rules against members and staff being involved in what are described as intimate relationships. Jackson stated that the allegations against Edwards are, quote, a distraction at best and political kryptonite at worst, noting that the House Ethics Committee investigation into these allegations are likely not to wrap up before the election, leaving the situation unresolved and potentially.
Driving down support for Chuck Edwards and what looks to be a very close race. The investigation was first reported by Axios, with Edwards allegedly crossing political boundaries and creating an uncomfortable work environment. That is directly from Axios. With one staffer reportedly feeling uncomfortable with Edwards' behavior towards her on multiple occasions during and after her time working for him. Axios reported allegations that Edwards vacationed with a woman in Las Vegas after she left his office.
Receipts allegedly attained by Axios indicate that Edwards booked two rooms at the Bellagio Hotel in Las Vegas from November the 11th to the 4th. A second female staffer in her 20s was also the recipient of gifts from Edwards, including a purse, reported Axios. The second staffer also accompanied him to events, including the 2024 White House Christmas Party. Axios reported that the staffer had declined to discuss her interactions with Edwards. He also complimented female employees, their outfits and appearances, according to multiple sources, speaking to Axios with both women who spoke anonymously, were frequently taken out for one-on-one dinners with Edwards, according to the publication.
However, the congressman clapping back on this, saying, I welcome any investigation, given the professionalism my staff has demonstrated and my commitment to serving the people of Western North Carolina. Given the current political environment we are facing in our nation, it comes as no surprise that others with their own political agendas will attempt to raise false accusations in order to create news stories. These allegations surrounding Edwards follow a recent investigation of the House Ethics Committee into another representative here in North Carolina, Democrat Alma Adams out of North Carolina's 12th congressional district, who the House Ethics Committee recently investigated regarding an inappropriate relationship with a female aide. In her office. That investigation did wrap up and cleared Adams of any wrongdoing.
According to Madison Andrus, who is a spokesperson for the Driple C, voters in North Carolina's 11th congressional district are tired of do-nothing Chuck Edwards. Edwards has voted in lockstep with DC policies that have betrayed Hurricane Helene survivors, led to higher bills at the grocery store, higher health care costs, and higher gas prices. North Carolinians can't trust him, and this November, they're going to send him packing to elect someone they can trust. According to quarter one campaign finance report, Democratic challenger Jamie Ager is well ahead, as well ahead of Edwards in terms of fundraising. Ager, a farmer from Western North Carolina, raised over $950,000 from more than 5,600 donors, according to those campaign finance reports, with more than $1 million cash on hand.
That total now more than $1.6 million. Edwards. Brought in more than $55,000 in quarter one with cycle to a date receipts just shy of $785,000, according to FEC campaign finance reports. According to that same Q1 report, Edwards' cash on hand at the close of the reporting period was just over $484,000, meaning that for Jamie Ager having more than a $1.2 million advantage right now in terms of financial support over the current congressman in Chuck Edwards. As we do know, money doesn't decide everything, but it is a major factor, especially in congressional elections across the state of North Carolina.
These allegations, the shifting demographics, potential shifting demographics in North Carolina's 11th congressional district, all adding up to what is expected to be one of the very close races that we watch coming up later on this year in early November. You up to date with all of the races that we're keeping a close eye on, and all of the pertinent information and relevant information right here on the Carolina Journal News Hour, and of course, on our website, CarolinaJournal.com. If the world were like a sleep number mattress, everything would adapt for your comfort. Because as your life changes and your body changes, Sleep Number mattresses adapt and shift to give you personalized comfort night after night. And now everything's on sale during our Memorial Day event.
Save up to $1,200 on mattresses for a limited time. To experience a whole new world of comfort, visit a Sleep Number store or go to sleepnumber.com. Sleep Number to a Good Life's Sleep. It's 5.36. Welcome back to the Carolina Journal News Hour.
Charlotte's FM News Talk 107.9 FM. WBT keeping track of our major statewide news this week. The leader of the North Carolina House and Senate, that is Destin Hall and Phil Berger, announcing earlier this week that they have, in fact, come to a top-line agreement, dealt with some of the major issues that have stalled the North Carolina state budget for the better part of a year now. With that, also discussion over levy limits, a major change and constitutional amendment that will be asked to voters here across the state of North Carolina. Back just a couple of weeks ago, here on the Carolina Journal News Hour, when we were hearing rumors that something like this could come forward, we chatted with Joseph Harris.
He is a fiscal policy analyst over at the John Locke Foundation. For those that missed this interview, Joseph Harris and I walked through what exactly is a levy limit and what is its relevance here across the state of North Carolina. Yeah. North Carolina voters could soon be asked through a constitutional amendment what they think about levy limits. It's a very important topic and conversation, and it has a huge impact not only on your monthly budget, but your year-end taxes and everything that you deal with.
To walk through some of those details on what is a levy limit and a very interesting discussion out of the North Carolina General Assembly, Joseph Harris from the John Locke Foundation joins us on the Carolina Journal News Hour. Joe, you joined us about a month ago. We talked about a report that you had over at the Locke Foundation as it related to a couple of counties that you highlighted that had really increased property tax rates over the last decade or so. Walk us through what a levy limit is and why is this something that lawmakers are actually asking voters if it's something they support or not. Thank you so much for having me on, Nick.
So, a levy limit is going to be a cap. On the annual growth rate of total property taxes within a jurisdiction.
So it is not a budget cut. It's just going to cap revenue growth moving forward. And currently, we have the situation here in North Carolina where property tax revenue collections and growth rates are pretty much up to the complete discretion of elected officials. What a levy limit would do instead would be to tie those property tax increases to economic realities instead of political discretion. And a well-designed levy limit would tie that revenue growth to something like population plus inflation.
Because those two metrics are essentially measuring Um The demand for that local government to need more revenue to provide services. A local government's gonna need more money if they have more people moving into their county. Or if the cost of providing people those services that they provide them goes up.
So a well-designed levy limit is going to allow a county to grow its revenue with its growth. You know, it's a very interesting discussion, and we have heard from people all across the state of North Carolina, more particularly in some more areas that have been booming as it relates to population growth. Joe, they've seen their property taxes go up 30% since they bought their house, not 30 years ago, but over just the last couple of years. This is turning out to be a major budget buster for a lot of North Carolina families. That's exactly right, Nick, and you make a great point because there has been some pushback.
when it comes to the levy limit because people are concerned how local governments are going to be able to fund what they need to do. But we forget about how these property tax bills are affecting the personal budgets of every individual household. they are the ones who are currently being strained.
So I think putting the concern on the local governments is a little bit disingenuous. But the reality of it is, is some of these local governments have literally doubled the amount of revenue they're bringing in in just a ten year period. And they made the argument that there's been so much population growth and there's been so much inflation. But we've seen that quite a few counties have went well beyond what they needed to to keep up with those two metrics. And essentially, what they've done is they've grown the role of government within their county.
And Joe, this is very relevant because, yes, while some of these areas, as you note, have seen an explosion in population growth and obviously the money is trickling in and they can, of course, raise that property tax rate and get even more money in. It is very hard to scale that back. We see that going on right now all across North Carolina as counties and municipalities are going through their budget season ahead of the start of the fiscal year on July the 1st. And these conversations are unfolding right now. It is very, very hard to get a county to convince the county commissioners or the city council members that they need to pair back the size of government, meaning that that rate is consistently going to go up, at least from my vantage point.
Yes, and currently as the situation stands, the type of levy limit that we're looking at putting in place would not be a budget cut at all. We would essentially whatever has occurred over the past decade, that would be baked or cooked into the equation and the baseline would be starting here.
Now, someone could maybe make an argument and say, well, that's not right because there were a lot of counties over the past decade that did a great job not increasing revenue drastically. And it's almost like punishing them and rewarding the ones that took advantage of the situation because they get no punishment and they get to keep that revenue. But in reality, when you start talking about actually cutting those budgets, that's when you do start opening up the can of worms that. Maybe you are going to put a local government in a tight situation fiscally. Because in some of these situations, even if we just make them revert back to a few years ago, that could be tens or close to $100 million in a big county like Wake, for example.
Um But there is that possibility in theory, you could create a levy limit and then retroactive it, right? You will you actually make us go back. But what we're talking about now, and you know, this is. What's at least being discussed is that we would just limit future increases going forward.
So it's not actually a budget cut and it's not actually going to reduce funding for schools or reduce funding for police. Whatever amount they brought in this year for that, it's not going to be cut. You're just not going to be able to grow the revenue at the faster rate. But yeah, there's arguments to be made, right, about whether or not that is the appropriate way to do it. But I think that's the cleanest way to do it.
And that's going to be the best way for everyone to understand. And we just. establish this as a new rule moving forward. Yeah, and you bring up a really good point there about what that ground floor would look like for counties that have been very fiscally responsible over the last decade, even 20-plus years, versus those that, and your report shows, have been a little bit loose with their tax rates and consistently jacking that up are at a significant advantage versus some of those other areas. For folks that don't follow government very closely, Joe, the property tax rate is not set by the state of North Carolina.
It is set by your municipality. If you live in a city or your county, whether you live in one or the other, in some cases, you're paying both.
So tell me why lawmakers in Raleigh are getting in on this conversation. As I understand it, there's both a House and Senate committee that are both looking at these property tax rates when that's something that typically state government is almost completely removed from. Yes, I think it's a response to their constituents reaching out to them, whether through social media or in person, when they've received their personal property tax bill with concerns and complaints and kind of feeling hopeless. I think everyone has kind of felt that at certain times. When you get your property tax bill, you can complain and you can try to rebut it.
But at the end of the day, you have very little leverage dealing with the county. And I think a lot of people were frustrated with that.
So they started reaching out to their legislators. There's a reality going on as well that there's been some tension between the House and the Senate. You know, we weren't able to actually get an official budget passed this year, and a lot of that had to do with disagreements on. Revenues that are going to be coming into the state over the next few years related to our personal income tax reductions.
So I see this as an opportunity for the General Assembly to provide tax relief or tax reform to their constituents without affecting their bottom line. And it's just the reality. When you're in government, whether you're on the left or the right, it doesn't make a difference. Typically, when you start talking about cutting your revenue, your mind just wants to go to, well, how are we going to replace that revenue with something else? Because we use that money to Provide and to please our constituents.
That's part of the political system. But in this situation, they can help those constituents, and it doesn't get into the whole. our personal income tax rate, are we bringing enough revenue in at the state level?
So I see that that's probably a big motivating factor as well, that it's something they think they can get done and they'll reap political benefit for it. You led me right down to the next question I was going to ask you. I'm sure there's got to be some frustration from lawmakers in Raleigh that over the last 15 years have consistently worked on reducing that personal income tax rate, have a plan in place right now to phase out the corporate tax rate by 2030. Joe, that should be a good thing. And people should be seeing more money in their paycheck every month and at the end of the year when they're going in or the beginning of the year when they're going through and filing their taxes.
But I would imagine in many of these areas, because the property tax rate has gone up so much, it's completely negating any of the tax savings that these individuals are seeing on their personal income tax rate that they're paying statewide. That's an excellent point, Nick, and that's exactly right. We've seen such great tax reform here in North Carolina since 2013, 2014. But the reality of it is, because of the drastic increase in property tax bills over the past five or six years, really, most of that has been offset. To where you don't even notice it, you don't even feel like you have more disposable income available because you might not actually, depending on how the math works for every individual, but you're getting a tax cut on the state side, but then you're getting a tax hike at the county level.
Yes. There was a hearing in or meeting, I should say, excuse me, in Raleigh this week of the House's version of this committee looking at property tax and a litany of other issues. They are now recommending to the full North Carolina House a constitutional amendment for voters to support a levy limit. Kind of a two-pronged question here. Why go the route of a constitutional amendment?
And how would something like that play out for voters? I think going the route of the constitutional amendment is just to solidify that this is something that the people want and that the General Assembly has the authority to do it. That said, the General Assembly does have the authority to do this. Cities and counties, they are creatures of the state. The state created them.
They did, you know, it's not the other way around. But I think it's to drive home the point that this is something that the people want. And what the constitutional amendment is going to do, it's essentially going to. Mandate the General Assembly to create a levy limit. It's basically authorizing them.
Us as taxpayers will either say, yes, this is something we want you to do, or no, this is something we don't. For that constitutional amendment, it requires a supermajority in the House and the Senate, which is 60% of the votes in each. Um, and then it'll just be a simple majority in the bat if it gets to the ballot box in November. Um, and then once that is passed, if it does pass. The General Assembly is going to actually need to create accompanying legislation.
which will actually define the specific parameters of the levy limit. It will break down the equation and explain how this formula is going to be calculated. And that's when it's going to be very important that they get it right. Because a levy limit in and of itself is not a solution, and it's not something that's necessarily good in and of itself. Policies are only as good as they are designed.
And we need to take into account that Yes, we want to stop local governments from aggressively hiking property taxes during housing booms. But we also don't want to constrain them so much that they're not able to keep up with inflation and population growth.
So it's finding that balance. And it also is gonna be very important that the property tax. Levy limit is comprehensive. Meaning, if you're in a jurisdiction and it's a property tax that's being collected, it has to fit under that cap. If there's exceptions for certain spending categories and exclusions for certain funds, we're just going to incentivize local governments to pivot more and more revenue generation in those areas, and the levy limit will have no integrity and it'll be pointless.
Yeah, you could cut your property taxes significantly to stay under the levy limit and then increase your local sales tax by 10X and kind of make up some of those additional funds.
So that would be a very interesting process. Joe, as you just laid out kind of a multi-pronged or multi-phased situation here, the General Assembly would have to approve adding it to the ballot. Voters would have to support it. And then the General Assembly would have to come in on the backside and actually pass the legislation mandated by those voters.
So not necessarily something that is going to happen right around the corner. We'll keep our eye on some of these movements in the North Carolina General Assembly as lawmakers are expected back next week in both the House and the Senate. We really appreciate the insight and information this morning. Joseph Harris from the John Locke Foundation joins us on the Carolina Journal News Hour. Yeah.
Good morning again. It's 5:53. Welcome back to the Carolina Journal News Hour, Charlotte's FM News Talk, 107.9 FM, WBT. We are learning some new information this week about the Senate Majority Pact, known as the SMP. This is the National Party committee to elect more Democratic candidates to the United States Senate.
They have officially announced an additional $31.5 million to support former Democrat Governor Roy Cooper in his U.S. Senate race against Michael Watley, the former head of the Republican National Committee and the North Carolina Republican Party. Senate Majority Pact spokesperson Lauren French said in a press release: Michael Watley has made it clear that his priority as senator will be acting as a rubber stamp for Donald Trump's costly agenda.
Nowhere is that truer than when he failed to secure real relief for North Carolinians after Hurricane Helen or stand. up for families. Being crushed by higher prices. Roy Cooper is putting North Carolina first above special interests and partisan politics to ensure every North Carolinian has a senator fighting for them. That, of course, directly from the committee here.
The $31.4 million is earmarked for a television reservation, meaning that the funds are utilized to reserve airtime on TV stations across the state of North Carolina in advance of the upcoming election, locking in rates and ensuring available airtime as we get closer to November. This is just about $5 million less than the $36 million that the SP spent on the North Carolina Senate election in 2020. Jim Sterling, who is a data consultant for North State elections, told the Carolina Journal the Senate Majority PAC's announcement of their plan to invest $31 million in spending is notable but unsurprising. We are already starting. To see some PACs aligned with Cooper and the Senate Majority PAC running ads to put the blame on Watley for Hurricane Helene recovery.
As is typical with these sorts of PAC spends, we should expect ads coming from groups to be ads targeted against Watley rather than in support of Cooper. The SP has also announced investments of $46.4 million in Ohio, $33.4 million in Maine, both for television, according to a recent press release. These are the three states where Democrats say they have opportunities to flip seats, making a play for control of the Senate. According to a recent, not only Carolina Journal, but other polling. Across the state of North Carolina, Cooper still does remain about a 7 to 11-point lead, depending on the poll that you look at.
We are expecting those numbers to tighten in as advertising picks up and as we get deeper into this election cycle. Andy Jackson, who is the director of the Civitas Center for Public Integrity at the John Locke Foundation, said that planned spending shows that despite Cooper's consistent lead in the polls, Democrats worry that they could lose the Senate race in North Carolina. Those are resources they probably wish they could spend in other states in their long shot attempt to flip control of the U.S. Senate. If Cooper is still way ahead of the polls in September, they may shift that spending to other states.
A recent poll by Election Integrity Group Wright Count had Cooper leading Watley by nine points. As I mentioned just a minute ago, other polls have had similar results, including one recently from High Point University. We'll be keeping. An eye on this race. It is definitely going to take a lot of the oxygen, a lot of the air out of the room.
We'll keep you up to date right here on the Carolina Journal News Hour. That's going to do it for a Thursday edition. WBT News is next, followed by Good Morning BT. We're back with you tomorrow morning, 5 to 6, right here on Charlotte's FM News Talk, 107.9 WBT. Uh What would you do if your online store converted 36% more shoppers?
You could take 36% more vacation. Another pina colada. Yes, please. Open a new retail location with 36% more square feet. Fantastic.
Hire 36% more help. You're hired and you're hired. Shopify has the world's best converting checkout, up to 36% better than other e-commerce platforms. What you do with those extra sales is up to you. Switch to Shopify today at shopify.com slash setup and get a $1 trial, shopify.com slash setup.
