Civitas Review Spring 2014 by Civitas Institute

CIVITAS REVIEW VOLUME X, ISSUE 1 SPRING 2014

TOOL TIME Building A Better North Carolina

Keep in Touch with Civitas! nccivitas.org

Our Mission The vision of the Civitas Institute is of a North Carolina whose citizens enjoy liberty and prosperity derived from limited government, personal responsibility and civic engagement.

@nccivitas facebook.com/ CivitasInstitute

The mission of the Civitas Institute is to facilitate the implementation of conservative policy solutions to improve the lives of all North Carolinians. Towards that end, Civitas provides research, information and training to: - empower citizens to become better civic leaders and more informed voters - educate emerging public leaders, enabling them to be more effective in the democratic process

youtube.com/ CivitasInstitute

- inform elected officials about citizen-based, free-market solutions to problems facing North Carolinians

CIVITAS REVIEW Volume X, Issue 1 Spring 2014

Publisher Editor Graphic Designer Production

Francis X. De Luca Jim Tynen Tiffany Taylor Chamblee Graphics

Board of Directors Chairman Members

President

Robert L. Luddy James I. Anthony Jr. H. Kenneth Dickson Jr. Marlene Mitchell Francis X. De Luca

All opinions expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the editors, or the staff and board, of the Civitas Institute. Letters to the Editor Want to sound off? Respond to an article? Point out an error? Send us accolades? Write james.tynen@nccivitas.org or send mail to: Letters to the Editor Civitas Institute 100 S. Harrington St. Raleigh, NC 27603

Civitas Review readers who want more information between issues can call 919.834.2099. Ask to receive our weekly e-letters, or you can go to www.nccivitas.org to sign up for them online. All non-advertising content published in Civitas Review may be republished as long as appropriate credit is given and it is published in its entirety. ÂŠ 2014 by John W. Pope Civitas Institute

ON T HE COVE R

2 Tool Time:

Building A Better North Carolina

4 Racist Roots

IN THIS ISSUE NOTE TO READERS

Progressives Sought White Supremacy in 1898

7 From Boston to Philadelphia

Fighting Real Inequality, Forging the Government We Want

10 Dangerous Demagoguery Exposing the ‘Inequality’ Ploy

12 D.C. Discontent Voting May Hinge on Unhappiness with Washington

14 Stress Test Common Core Brings Confusion, Stifles Creativity

17 Profit Power The Myth of ‘Trickle-Down Economics’

18 Undaunted True the Vote’s Leader Battles Fed Intimidation

20 Partisan Warfare CPI Suggests Shift in Political Alignment

22 Filed Down 55 Candidates Are Already Winners

24 Progressive Paradoxes Lessons From the Life of Josephus Daniels

26 Jump Start North Carolina’s 2013 in One Chart

28 America, We Can Do Better

This will be your last issue of Civitas Review if you have not done one of the following: • Attended a Civitas event • Attended Civitas Training • Donated to Civitas at any level We thank you for reading and hope you will decide to continue receiving Civitas Review.

BUILDING

NORTH by Francis X. De Luca

This issue of Civitas Review is meant to provide you with tools to bolster conservative principles, free markets, and individual freedom and responsibility. 2

CI V I TA S R E V I E W

First, conservatives must understand the true history of North Carolina. As Faulkner wrote, the past is never dead; it’s not even past. Since 2010, self-styled progressives have cried racism at the Republican-dominated General Assembly. The historical truth, however, is revealed by looking at the election of 1898, when progressive Democrats stoked racial animosity in the “White Supremacy Campaign.” Beginning on page 4 you’ll find Civitas Election Analyst Susan Myrick’s recounting of that dark chapter in NC history. Also, on page 24, we review a biography of the state’s leading progressive kingpin of that era: Josephus Daniels, owner of The News & Observer in Raleigh. We also need not only an understanding of the past, but a blueprint for moving ahead. More and more, a dynamic new generation of leaders is bringing forward new ideas and proposals to restore our freedom and prosperity. Starting on page 7, you will find an adaptation of remarks U.S. Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) made in response to President Obama’s State of the Union address. You may not agree with all his ideas, but it’s essential for conservatives to tinker with new concepts and look to the future.

G A BETTER

H CAROLINA Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal also reminds us that America can do better, and that conservative principles can fix our problems (See page 28.) Catherine Engelbrecht, founder of True the Vote, (pp. 18-19) shows us that our most essential tool might be the courage to stand up for our convictions. It also looks as if “inequality” will be the Left’s mantra this year. One way to take action is to read how economist Walter Williams takes apart this ploy on pages 10-11. Speaking of discredited liberal slogans, Civitas Policy Director Brian Balfour explains why there never has been a “trickle down” economic theory; instead, the benefits of free enterprise flow up from the bottom, and only pay off as profits once workers and other businesses have been paid. (See page 17.) Another phrase until recently has

been talked about very quietly, if at all: Common Core State Standards. This national education standard masquerades as a “higher” standard while leaving our students with a mediocre education. It also threatens local control of the schools, even as it confuses teachers, students and parents with yet another education fad. Turn to page 14 to begin reading one North Carolina teacher’s insights about what Common Core is really all about. This is an election year, of course, making it vital for conservatives to know what the political landscape looks like. Our election analysis (on pages 12 and 13) will give you insights on how the campaigns will play out from now until November. Moreover, our Civitas Partisan Index (pages 20-21) breaks down the political leanings of every legislative district in North Carolina. The following two

pages will show which legislative districts have contested primary and/or general elections, and in which districts one candidate is already assured of victory because no opponent has filed to run. Comparing the maps will give you added insights into the 2014 political landscape. Finally, there has been much discussion about how having a Republican governor and a Republican-dominated General Assembly affected the state. Our answer in one glance is the chart on page 26. These are just a few of the many tools we at Civitas hope to have available for you this year. Keep an eye on www.nccivitas.org, the Civitas Review blog, our Facebook page, Twitter, our weekly e-newsletter, and Civitas Capitol Connection newspaper for the latest information to help you do your part in building a better North Carolina. SP R I N G 2 014

RACIST ROOTS Progressives Sought ‘White Supremacy’ in 1898 by Susan Myrick

“What you do in this world is a matter of no consequence. The question is, What can you make people believe you have done?” Arthur Conan Doyle, A Study in Scarlet 2

CI V I TA S R E V I E W

It shouldn’t have come as a surprise this year that North Carolina Democrats and self-styled progressives reacted with fury when Republicans took over the General Assembly and the governor’s office. That’s because Democrats and progressives reacted the same way when their hold on power was threatened more than a century ago. A little over a year ago, on Feb. 22, 2013, the Charlotte Observer broke the story of a leaked strategy memo from leftist group Blueprint NC that described the game plan “progressive” groups should use to “eviscerate” the Republican leadership. While the memo itself was scandalous, it exposed the liberal Left’s determination to regain the power that had been lost to conservatives in the 2010 and 2012 elections. No student of North Carolina history would underestimate what the Left will do in such circumstances. To understand this, we must look back to the late 1800s, when Democrats in the legislature controlled almost every level of government, including the state’s county commissions. The County Government Act of 1877

provided that the legislature would appoint justices of the peace, who would then select county commissioners, giving the Democrats in the legislature control of the commissions, and thus much of the rest of local government. By the 1890s, North Carolina had two other political factions, the Republicans, including most black voters, and Populists, who attracted many poor whites. These two groups devised a plan to defeat Democrats by creating a “Fusion” movement. In 1894, the two parties agreed to challenge every Democratic candidate and in their separate conventions voted on a slate of candidates that included candidates from both the Populist and Republican parties. In 1894, Fusion candidates won a majority in the legislature and won both U.S. Senate seats. During the Fusion era, AfricanAmericans voted and held elected offices throughout North Carolina in this era. The Fusion plan worked again in 1896, when the alliance retained control of the legislature and elected a Republican governor, Daniel Russell. Russell, however, would be the last Republican governor in North Carolina

until James Holshouser was elected in 1973. Democrats – led by their progressive wing – struck back in 1898 with the “White Supremacy Campaign.” The name was accurate: White supremacy was its main tactic and ultimate result. Then as now, progressives thought of themselves as having lofty goals for the betterment of the people. But in 1898, Tar Heel progressives decided they could only attain their aims by playing the race card to divide and defeat the Fusion coalition. Furnifold Simmons, chairman of the Democratic Executive Committee, and Josephus Daniels, publisher of The News & Observer, were leaders of the White Supremacy Campaign. (See story on pages 24 and 25.) The campaign stoked racial hatred, used intimidation as a weapon, and ultimately incited violence. These shameful tactics worked. The drive effectively rolled back the gains the Fusion alliance had achieved in the previous two election cycles. The Democratic Party disenfranchised black voters and returned to its dominant role on all levels of govern-

Josephus Daniels, publisher of the N&O

Sen. Sam Ervin

NC NAACP President William Barber

SP R I N G 2 014

ment. The defeat weakened the Republican Party to the point that it took the GOP 112 years to gain control of both houses of the General Assembly. Yet Democrats and progressives still deny that it was their political forebears – their heroes – who acted in such a despicable way. That’s the rub: North Carolina’s liberals/leftists must always work to distance themselves from their movement’s ugly roots – racism and bare-knuckle politics. Today’s liberals attempt to brand the White Supremacy Campaign as a conservative movement, but its leaders and members were mostly known progressives. That’s also why today’s liberals gloss over the fact that during the era of segregation Democrats totally dominated the state. Today’s liberals even go so far as to suggest that racists in the Democratic Party, after the Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act were passed in 1964 and 1965, respectively, defected to the Republican Party. But there is no evidence to prove this assertion, in either voter registration changes or instances of prominent Democratic politicians who voted against these bills leaving the Democratic Party to join the Republican Party. For example, Democratic U.S. Sen. Sam Ervin was a segregationist who voted against the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the 1965 Voting Rights Act. Yet he continues to be hailed as a Democratic hero, mostly for his role in the Watergate hearings. Indeed, both of North Carolina’s U.S. senators and all of its congressional delegation (of which there were two Republicans) voted against these two pieces of legislation. It doesn’t matter to the progressive Left that the truth is Republicans voted for the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Vot6

CI V I TA S R E V I E W

ing Rights Act of 1965 in much larger percentages than did Democrats, and without strong Republican support the laws would not have passed. It doesn’t matter, because they know that if you repeat a lie enough, people won’t search for the truth and the progressive media is always at the ready to repeat lies to defeat conservatives. Perhaps that is why liberals in North Carolina consistently call their enemies racists – to deflect attention from liberalism’s own sordid history. We heard their hate-filled rhetoric during the 2013 legislative session. The leaked strategy memo gave us a peek into North Carolina’s liberal/Left organizational structure and revealed their desperation to get back the power they had held for generations. It’s hard to deny that the Left enthusiastically and relentlessly executed the Blueprint NC memo’s strategic plan: “Cripple their leaders ([Gov.] McCrory, [House Speaker] Tillis, [Senate President Pro Tem] Berger etc.)” and “Eviscerate the leadership and weaken their ability to govern.” A swarm of liberal, progressive and socialist groups rallied at the legislative building on Mondays (and some other days) during the session to protest the new majority’s work and at the same time accuse them of racism and bigotry. We are even hearing William Barber, president of the NC NAACP, describe these groups as the “fusion movement.” Today, the tide has turned in North Carolina partisan politics. In the 2010 General Election, running in districts drawn up by Democrats, Republicans won majorities in both the state House and Senate but had to battle against Democratic Gov. Bev Perdue’s 19 vetoes. In 2012 they added to their numbers and gained the majorities they needed to override a governor’s

veto, thought that could be viewed as a luxury because a Republican was elected governor. And, it was the first time four Republicans were elected to the state’s Council of State in one year. Moreover, the North Carolina Democratic Party is in a shambles. The party’s decline can be attributed to a list of disgraced politicos and a state party embroiled in controversy, including a sexual misconduct scandal, the forced resignation of the state party’s executive director, and the failed attempt to replace the state chairman ahead of the 2012 election. More recently, the party has fired the executive director hired in May 2013 to replace the one accused of sexual harassment, and the turmoil has continued this year. Some even suggest that Barber, as president of the NC NAACP and the leader of the coalition of groups that have protested against the legislature on Mondays during the last session, is the face of and de facto head of the Democratic Party. He definitely has the progressive/liberal credentials and rhetoric to be such a leader. What may be even more ominous for the liberal Left, but probably not as widely known, is who the voters of North Carolina voted for in the 2012 General Election. Using the Civitas Partisan Index model and comparing the votes for Democratic Party and Republican Party in Council of State races, we see a dramatic shift from 2008 to 2012 – more than 5 percentage points. In 2008, statewide, Tar Heels gave Democratic candidates 53.4 percent of the vote and 46.6 percent for Republican candidates; in the 2012 model, the average vote statewide was nearly even: 50.6 percent Democratic to 49.4 percent Republican. While it is true that historically, in Council of CONTINUED

PAGE

FROM BOSTON TO PHILADELPHIA Fighting Real Inequality, Forging the Government We Want by Sen. Mike Lee

It is time for a new reform movement that will address the needs of those Americans who feel they have been forgotten by both political parties: those individuals and families who work hard, play by the rules, balance their budgets, honor the Golden Rule ... and don’t understand why Washington can’t do the same. You are probably frustrated about an ever-growing government that somehow thinks it is OK to lie to, spy on and even target its own citizens. Many hardworking Americans are discouraged and wondering what, if anything, can be done. I believe we need to do what Americans have always done – come together and press for positive change. Protesting against dysfunctional government is a great American tradition, going back to the original Tea Party in Boston. In 1773, Americans had simply had it with a London-based national government that had become too big, too expensive and far too intrusive. It is important to note, however, that had the founding generation stopped at just protesting against the kind of government Americans did not want, the Boston Tea Party would have been little more than a footnote in history. Fortunately for all of us, those early patriots moved on from Boston and moved past their protest against the government they didn’t want. They marched forward on a road toward the kind of government they did want. It took them 14 long years to get from Boston to Philadelphia, where they created, with our Constitution, the kind of government they did want. In America, the test of any political movement is not what that movement is against, but what it is for. The 8

CI V I TA S R E V I E W

founders made a point at Boston Harbor, but they made history in Philadelphia’s Independence Hall. Unfortunately, in recent years, we have had no choice but to engage in a number of protests against our current president’s Washington-centered agenda. As Americans we must always be willing to fight the Boston-type battles, but we must do so with an eye toward Philadelphia, maintaining a positive focus on the kind of nation we want to be and become. Today, Americans know in their hearts that something is wrong. Much of what is wrong relates to the sense that the “American Dream” is falling out of reach for far too many of us. We are facing an inequality crisis, one to which the President has paid lip service but seems uninterested in truly confronting or correcting. This inequality crisis presents itself in three principal forms: • immobility among the poor, who are being trapped in poverty by biggovernment programs; • insecurity in the middle class, where families are struggling just to get by and can’t seem to get ahead; • and cronyist privilege at the top, where political and economic insiders twist the immense power of the federal government to profit at the expense of everyone else.

To be fair, President Obama and his party did not create all of these problems. The Republican Establishment in Washington can be just as out-of-touch as the Democratic Establishment. However, the President’s administration continues to leave poor and middle-class families further behind, while he and his allies insist that the real problem is “inequality” itself. But where does this new inequality come from? From government – every

time it takes rights and opportunities away from the American people and gives them instead to politicians, bureaucrats, and special interests. Inequality – real inequality – is trapping poor children in failing schools to benefit bureaucrats and union bosses. It’s penalizing low-income parents for getting married or getting better jobs. Inequality is guaranteeing insurance companies taxpayer bailouts if Obamacare cuts into their profits.

Inequality is blocking thousands of middle-class jobs in the energy industry as a favor to partisan donors and radical environmental activists. Inequality is denying viable, unborn children any protection under the law, while exempting unsanitary, late-term abortion clinics from basic safety standards. Inequality is denying citizens their right to define marriage in their states as traditionally or as broadly as their diverse values dictate.

and to level the playing field and put corporate and political insiders back to work for the rest of us. A new generation of reformers in both the House and Senate are hard at work developing proposals within this new conservative reform agenda that mark the road to Philadelphia. These principles and these policies will work – and will put Americans back to work – not just by cutting big government, but by fixing broken government. And not just by making government smaller but by promoting bigger citizens, stronger families and more heroic communities. Our goal should be an America where everyone has a fair chance “In America, the test of any to pursue happiness – and find it. That’s what it looks like when political movement is not what protest grows into reform. So if you’re one of those that movement is against, but Americans that big government is leaving behind – if you work what it is for. The founders made hard, play by the rules and teach your kids to do the same – I want a point at Boston Harbor, but they you to know that your family will not be forgotten anymore. made history in Philadelphia’s I am confident that our best days as a nation are ahead of us Independence Hall.” – not because of government, but because within America’s diverse society of individuals and Hopefully our leaders, reformers families, neighborhoods and churches, and citizens will join the journey from businesses and communities, freedom Inequality is the federal governBoston to Philadelphia – from protest doesn’t mean you’re on your own. Freement hurting rural communities, espeto progress. Together we can march dom means we’re all in this together. cially in the West, by controlling and forward and take the road that leads to I invite you to join us on the road to mismanaging public lands. the kind of government we do want. a more prosperous America. Together Inequality is changing laws withWe have a new generation of leadwe can create the kind of government out congressional approval, and spyers in Washington with positive, inwe do want and the kind of nation our ing on American citizens without novative ideas – thoughtful policy rechildren and grandchildren deserve. constitutional authority. forms to, as my friend Sen. Ted Cruz ———— And Obamacare all by itself is an says, “Make D.C. listen.” These are Republican Mike Lee is the junior Senator inequality Godzilla that has robbed reforms to help poor families work from Utah. This article is adapted from his working families of their insurance, their way into the middle class, to help response on TeaPartyExpress.org to President their doctors, their wages and their middle-class families start to get ahead, Obama’s State of the Union address. jobs. Many Americans are now seeing why some of us fought so hard to stop this train wreck over the last four years. But I think maybe – just maybe – that’s finally starting to change. As a nation we are, once again, at a critical turning point. Now, as in 1773, Americans have had it with our out-of-touch national government. But if all we do is protest, our Boston Tea Party moment will occupy little more than a footnote in our history.

SP R I NG 2 014

DANGEROUS DEMAGOGUERY Exposing the ‘Inequality’ Ploy by Dr. Walter Williams

Democrats plan to demagogue income inequality and the wealth gap for political gain in this year’s elections. Most of what’s said about income inequality is stupid or, at best, ill-informed. Much to their disgrace, economists focusing on measures of income inequality bring little light to the issue. Let’s look at it. 10

CI V I TA S R E V I E W

Income is a result of something. As such, results alone cannot establish whether there is fairness or justice. Take a simple example to make the point. Suppose Tom, Dick and Harry play a weekly game of poker. The result is: Tom wins 75 percent of the time. Dick and Harry, respectively, win 15 percent and 10 percent of the time. Knowing only the game’s result permits us to say absolutely nothing as to whether there has been poker fairness or justice. Tom’s disproportionate winnings are consistent with his being either an astute player or a clever cheater. To determine whether there has been poker justice, the game’s process must be examined. Process questions we might ask are: Were Hoyle’s rules obeyed; were the cards unmarked; were the cards dealt from the top of the deck; and did the players play voluntarily? If these questions yield affirmative answers, there was poker fairness and justice, regardless of the game’s result, even with Tom’s winning 75 percent of the time. Similarly, income is a result of something. In a free society, for the most part, income is a result of one’s capacity to serve his fellow man and the value his fellow man places on that service. Say I mow your lawn and you pay me $50. That $50 might be seen as a certificate of performance. Why? It serves as evidence that I served my fellow man and enables me to make a claim on what he produces when I visit the grocer. Google founders Sergey Brin and Larry Page are multibillionaires. Just as in the case of my serving my fellow man by mowing his lawn, they served their fel-

low man. The difference is they served many more of their fellow men and did so far more effectively than I and hence have received many more “certificates of performance,” which enables them to make greater claims on what their fellow man produces, such as big houses, cars and jets. Brin and Page and people like them created wealth by producing services that improve the lives of millions upon millions of people all around the globe. Should people who have improved our

about income inequality, we should focus on how to give people greater capacity to serve their fellow man, namely raise their productivity. To accomplish that goal, let’s look at a few things that we shouldn’t do. Becoming a taxicab owner-operator lies within the grasp of many, but in New York City, one must be able to get a license (medallion), which costs $700,000. There are hundreds of examples of government restrictions that reduce opportunity. What about the grossly fraudulent education received by so many minority youngsters? And then we handicap them further with laws that mandate that businesses pay them wages that exceed their productivity, which denies them on-thejob training. Think back to my poker example. If one is concerned about the game’s result, which is more just, taking some of Tom’s winnings and redistributing them to Dick and Harry or teaching Dick and Harry how to play better? If left to politicians, they’d prefer redistribution. That way, they could get their hands on some of Tom’s winnings. That’s far more rewarding to them than raising Dick’s and Harry’s productivity. ———— Walter Edward Williams is the John M. Olin Distinguished Professor of Economics at George Mason University, as well as a syndicated columnist and author. He will be speaking at this year’s Conservative Leadership Conference. This article is reprinted with permission of Walter E. Williams and Creators Syndicate, Inc.

“... if there’s anything to

be done about income

inequality, we should focus on how to give people

greater capacity to serve their fellow man, namely raise their productivity.” lives be held up to ridicule and scorn because they have higher income than most of us? Should Congress confiscate part of their wealth in the name of fairness and income redistribution? Except in many instances when government rigs the game with crony capitalism, income is mostly a result of one’s productivity and the value that people place on that productivity. Far more important than income inequality is productivity inequality. That suggests that if there’s anything to be done

SP R I NG 2 014

D.C. Discontent Voting May Hinge on Unhappiness with Washington

by Francis X. De Luca As we approach the midterm elections in November 2014, you will be inundated with polling numbers and prognostications. As you sort through the information, I wanted to give you a few things to keep in mind. Generally an election during the sixth year of a presidency, as is this year, has not been kind to the party of the sitting president. There have been exceptions, most notably the 1998 election, where Democrats picked up seats in the U.S. House and Senate, though Bill Clinton was in the White House. It should be noted that the economy at the time was in good shape and the stock market was enjoying the dotcom boom. As the 2014 election approaches, Civitas polling in North Carolina is 12

CI V I TA S R E V I E W

telling us voters are in a sour mood regarding the economy and Washington D.C. If these trends continue, Democrats are going to be running into a stiff headwind in November. Voters are unhappy with the president’s health care law, they are paying more attention to D.C. actions than state happenings, and they are negative on the economy. One of the most startling numbers we find in our polling is the answer to a question we regularly ask: “Thinking about the economy, in your opinion, how much longer do you think it will take for the economy to improve and the current recession to end? If you think the current recession has ended, just say so.” Since we started

asking this question in 2009 only once, in May 2013, has the percentage of people who said the recession has ended reached as high as 10 percent. It is consistently in single digits! Sadly, the number saying that the recession will last longer than a year has ranged between 73 and 86 percent, with our latest number being 79 percent. That is a shocking number. Remember, the recession officially ended in June 2009 – but not according to NC voters. Why is this important? If voters are nervous about the economy, they usually want to blame someone. In most cases they blame the president and his party. This pessimism on the CONTINUED

PAGE

Thinking#about#the#economy,#in#your#opinion,#how#much# Thinking about the economy, in your opinion, how much longer do longer#do#you#think#it#will#take#for#the#economy#to# you think it will take for the economy to improve and the current # improve#and#the#current#recession#to#end? recession to end? 1% 1%'

Under'6'months' Between'6'months'and'a'year''

5%'

Between'1'and'2'years'

17%' 62%' 62%

Over'2'years' Recession'has'ended'

7%'

Don't'Know'

7%' 0%' 10%' 20%' 30%' 40%' 50%' 60%' 70%'

Thinking ahead to the 2014 And#regardless#of#how#you#would#vote#at#the#s And regardless of how you would Thinking#ahead#to#the#2014#elecHon,#in#general#which# election, in general which issues vote at the state level, in#CivitasPoll# voting voGng#for#US#Congress,#are#you#more#likely#to# # ssues#are#you#more#concerned#with...# are you more concerned with... for US Congress, are you more likely to vote for...

And#regardless#of#how#you#would#vote#at#the#state#level,#in# voGng#for#US#Congress,#are#you#more#likely#to#vote#for...## 6%' 014#elecHon,#in#general#which# 19%' 9%' e#2014#elecHon,#in#general#which# And#regardless#of#how#you#would#vote#at#the#state#level,#in# And#regardless#of#how#you#would#vote#at#the#state#level,#in# # # cerned#with...# Federal'Issues' concerned#with...# n,#in#general#which# oGng#for#US#Congress,#are#you#more#likely#to#vote#for...## voGng#for#US#Congress,#are#you#more#likely#to#vote#for...## 44%' 44% 47%' State'Issues' # th...# And#regardless#of#how#you#would#vote#at#the#state#level,#in# Both' voGng#for#US#Congress,#are#you#more#likely#to#vote#for...## 40%' 32%' 32% Republican' 9%' 6%'

6%'

6%' 9%' Federal'Issues' Federal'Issues' 47%'47%' State'Issues' 44%' 6%' 40%' State'Issues' Federal'Issues' 9%' State'Issues' Both'Both' 9%'

40%' Both'

44%' 40%'

candidates'

Re ca

De ca

DemocraKc' Republican' Republican' candidates' candidates' 44%' candidates' Neither/'Other/'Mix' DemocraKc' Republican' DemocraKc' candidates' #CivitasPoll# 44%' candidates' candidates' Neither/'Other/'Mix' Don’t'Know'' DemocraKc' Neither/'Other/'Mix' candidates' SP R I NG 2 014 13 Don’t'Know'' Neither/'Other/'Mix' Don’t'Know''

STRESS TEST Common Core Brings Confusion, Stifles Creativity

Civitas Review: Tell us about yourself. Lisa Stafford: I am from Greenville, a small town in south Alabama. After graduating from high school I attended Wesleyan College, a women’s college in Macon, Ga. I transferred to Auburn University in Auburn, Ala. and graduated in 1982. I have a bachelor’s degree in Early Childhood/ Elementary Education. I am currently teaching fourth grade. This is my sixth year teaching in North Carolina. I taught for 25 years in Alabama. We’ve been hearing a lot about Common Core State Standards (CCSS). You’re in the classroom; what are your thoughts about it? The CCSS have been written by people who are not in the classroom. I’ve always felt that the people who were farthest from the classroom made the most decisions about what happens or should happen in a typical classroom. Teachers were not involved in any of this. At my school we are being asked to develop unit plans that go along with the CC; however, we aren’t given any guidance or resources to work with. It seems to me that all this was put together without much thought as to how it would be carried out. We are

required to teach the standards when the only thing we know about them is what is available through the NCDPI [North Carolina Department of Public Instruction]. Each teacher has the responsibility of going online, downloading the standards, and trying to decipher them. I don’t think they are more rigorous; I think they are more confusing, and expecting teachers to teach to these standards and ultimately the students to score well on the test is beyond ridiculous. I feel like we are building the ship after it has left the port. Who knows if we will build it right or if we will sink to the bottom? What bothers me the most is that our children are the guinea pigs in this little experiment. From your perspective, what exactly is wrong with Common Core? Shouldn’t we all be in favor of higher standards? We should all be in favor of higher standards, but I don’t think the [CCSS] standards are higher. I have been in the classroom for many years, and have seen many things come and go. I’ve never known anything to have this much controversy surround it. How could anyone think that the federal government is doing what is best for us? What happens

in a local school system should be determined by leaders/teachers/parents from that school system. What exactly does Common Core change or do in the classroom that parents should be concerned about? Parents need to know that most teachers are as confused about this as they are. They need to understand that the teacher is not the enemy here. Teachers are doing what they are told to do for fear of losing their jobs. Parents need to know that most teachers are wonderful, creative, loving adults who want to do what is best for their students. [Common Core] takes most of that away from the classroom teacher. We, and the students, are expected to move along at such a rapid pace that students aren’t given ample time to master a skill before another one is introduced. We test, reteach, and then retest students on a weekly basis. How does Common Core impact the children that you are teaching? What do you see? I’m not sure that the students are aware of the changes. Most of my students understand that there is a lot of emphasis placed on testing. This causes much anxiety and stress. Stu-

As North Carolina schools implement the new Common Core State Standards (CCSS) in math and English language arts, the standards have become a frequent topic of discussion among the public and the media. One group that has been greatly impacted by these changes but noticeably absent from much of the discussion is the teaching profession. Civitas Review interviewed Lisa Stafford, a fourth-grade teacher at Benson Elementary School in Benson, N. C. SP R I NG 2 014

dents, at least in upper grades, know that their classroom performance is no longer valued, because, even though it hasn’t been said directly to them, they know how much “testing” means to the school. Do the standards tell teachers how to teach? Yes, the standards do tell teachers how to teach. We no longer have the freedom to pick and choose how to present material or what materials to use for our students. I have been a reading/language arts teacher for most of my career; however, this year I am teaching all subjects, and math is the one that is giving me reason for concern. I am being told that I can’t teach the “old” way, and that as long as students can explain how they got their answers, they are correct. Now, I know, there are different ways to reach the right answer, but the ways that CC wants students to work math problems are much more confusing than anything my “old fashioned” ways could be. Does Common Core allow teachers to bring their own creativity into the classroom? Common Core does stifle teachers’ creativity. We have to follow the curriculum so strictly, and that does not leave much room for “fun” or “creative” activities any more. I like to incorporate crafts, cooking, and projects in my classroom, but with the Common Core, I am kept on such a tight schedule with having to follow the standards so exactly, that I don’t have time to do the things I used to do. The authors of CC are not interested in any “creative” ways of presenting material to the students.

CI V I TA S R E V I E W

Common Core advocates say teachers and administrators were given ample opportunity to provide feedback about the standards. Is that true? We didn’t hear much about it at my school. We were told at a staff meeting that North Carolina was receiving Race to the Top Grant money, yet no one mentioned Common Core at the time. There still hasn’t been much talk about it, except that we are implementing it. As far as I can tell, no one at my school has even questioned it. I started reading about it, on my own, and became very concerned. What about testing? In your opinion, how will Common Core impact the quality and frequency of testing? Now that teachers evaluations will be tied to their student’s test scores, the stress level has increased 100 percent. Students are tested too often and I imag-

ine the cost of these tests, along with the technology schools have to have in order to administer the tests, has got to be astronomical. In my opinion, these tests are simply a money-making deal for some company. There is no need to test students as often as we do in order to know if they have mastered a skill or not. “Data” is a buzzword that is thrown around often in education. Those in charge love to collect it, talk about it, and even display it in the schools. If you could change anything about Common Core what would you change? I would stop/pause the implementation of Common Core. I would try to get the word out to everyone what CC is all about. I would like to see it talked about in the media. I’m tired of this happening without it being public knowledge. After all, it is the public that funds public schools.

“I feel like we are building the ship after it has left the port. Who knows if we will build it right or if we will sink to the bottom? What bothers me the most is that our children are the guinea pigs in this little experiment.”

Profit Power

The Myth of ‘Trickle-Down Economics’

by Brian Balfour Pop quiz: What do you do when you are a politician who finds himself incapable of debating the merits of an opposing viewpoint? Answer: Invent a viewpoint no one holds, critique that viewpoint, and claim intellectual victory. That’s what happens when politicians – including President Obama – assail “trickle-down economics,” when in fact the truth is exactly the opposite of what liberals think it is. As Thomas Sowell noted in his book Basic Economics, “‘Trickle down’ has been a characteriza-

tion and rejection of what somebody else supposedly believed.” But “no recognized economist of any school of thought has ever had any such theory or made any such proposal. It is a straw man. It cannot be found in even the most voluminous and learned histories of economic theories.” He added, “Economic processes work in the directly opposite way from that depicted by those who imagine that profits first benefit business owners and that benefits only belatedly trickle down to workers.”

As almost any entrepreneur can tell you, when a business investment is made it is the workers who get paid first. For instance, when a new restaurant opens up, construction workers and interior designers get paid for building or renovating the space. Companies make money providing the furnishings and kitchen equipment. The wait staff, cooks and cleaning crew receive regular paychecks; the food and beverage suppliers likewise get paid. Only later, if the restaurant is successful, do the owners see a return on their investment. Even hugely successful corporations often take years to break even. For instance, Amazon began in 1995 but didn’t turn its first profit until six years later after sustaining billions in losses. All that time, its workers and suppliers kept collecting checks. As Sowell put it, “In short, the sequence of payments is directly opposite of what is assumed by those who talk about a ‘trickle down’ theory. The workers must be paid first and then the profits flow upward later – if at all.” There is a real debate to be had over the best public policies to promote economic growth. Unfortunately, the President and many progressives aren’t interested in participating. Instead, they would rather slay the imaginary trickle-down dragon. Since their understanding of the economy is exactly backward, we shouldn’t be surprised when liberal policies bring not prosperity but economic misery. ———— A version of this article appeared in the Fayetteville Observer. SP R I NG 2 014

UNDAUNT President and founder of the election integrity group True the Vote Catherine Engelbrecht testified before the U.S. House Oversight and Government Reform Committee’s Subcommittee on Regulatory Affairs Feb. 6. This excerpt from her testimony reveals the kind of courage and determination conservatives will likely need in the current political climate. I am an average American who, prior to 2009, had never been active in the processes of government. But after volunteering to work at the polls in Texas in the 2009 elections, I saw fundamental procedural problems that I felt could not go unaddressed. So, I started True the Vote, an organization that grew into a national movement to ensure that every American voter has an opportunity to participate in elections that are free and fair. My life before I spoke out for good government stands in stark contrast to the life I now lead. As a wife, a mother, and small businesswoman working with my husband, raising our children and participating in my church and PTA, the government collected my taxes and left me and my family in peace. But when I helped found and led True the Vote and King Street Pa18

CI V I TA S R E V I E W

triots, I found myself a target of this federal government. Shortly after filing IRS forms to establish 501(c) (3) and 501(c)(4) tax-exempt organizations, an assortment of federal entities – including law enforcement agencies and a Congressman from Maryland, Elijah Cummings – came knocking at my door. In nearly two decades of running our small business, my husband and I never dealt with any government agency, outside of filing our annual tax returns. We had never been audited, we had never been investigated, but all that changed upon submitting applications for the nonprofit statuses of True the Vote and King Street Patriots. Since that filing in 2010, my private businesses, my nonprofit organizations, and family have been subjected to more than 15 instances of audit or inquiry by federal agencies. In 2011, my personal and business tax returns were audited by the Internal Revenue Service, each audit going back for a number of years.

In 2012, my business was subjected to inspection by OSHA, on a select occasion when neither my husband nor I were present, and though the agency wrote that it found nothing serious or significant, it still issued fines in excess of $20,000. In 2012 and again in 2013 the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms [and Explosives] conducted comprehensive audits at my place of business. Beginning in 2010, the FBI contacted my nonprofit organization on six separate occasions – wanting to cull through membership manifests in conjunction with domestic terrorism cases. They eventually dropped all matters and have now redacted nearly all my files. All of these incursions into my affairs began after filing applications for tax exemption. There is no other remarkable event, no other reason, to explain away how for decades I went unnoticed, but now find myself on the receiving end of interagency coordination into and against all facets of my life, both public and private. Bear in mind, distinguished ladies and gentlemen of this subcommittee, these events were occurring while the IRS was subjecting me to multiple rounds of abusive inquiries, with re-

TED

True the Vote’s Leader Battles Fed Intimidation

quests to provide every Facebook and Twitter entry I’d every posted, questions about my political aspirations, and demands to know the names of every group I’d ever made presentations to, the content of what I’d said, and where I intended to speak for the coming year. The answers to these sorts of questions are not of interest to the typical IRS analyst, but they are of great interest to a political machine that puts its own survival above the civil liberties of any private citizen. This government attacked me because of my political beliefs, but I refuse to be cast as a victim; not to the IRS, not to the FBI, not to OSHA, not to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, or to any other government agency. I am not a victim, because to be a victim is to accept that I have no options. I do have options and I intend to use them all to the fullest extent of my capabilities. As an American citizen, I am part of a country that still believes in freedom of speech, and so I will continue to speak out, here in Congress and all across this country, I will continue to press

in every legal way possible, as I did by filing suit against the Internal Revenue Service. No American citizen should be willing to accept a government that uses its power against its own people. I also refuse to let a precedent be set that allows members of Congress, particularly the ranking member of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, to misrepresent this governing body in an effort to demonize and intimidate citizens. Three times Rep. Elijah Cummings sent letters to True the Vote demanding much of the same information that the IRS had requested. Hours after sending letters, he would appear on cable news and publicly defame me and my organization. Such tactics are unacceptable. It is for these reasons that immediately after this hearing I

am filing a formal complaint with the House Office of Congressional Ethics and asking for a full investigation. After all the tyranny, all the things that have been done to my organizations, to my family and to me, many people would have quit. And, Mr. Chairman, many Americans have quit. I have heard, over and over, that people are afraid to tell their stories because of what has or might happen to them and their families at the hands of our own government. But know this, my experiences at the hands of this government in these last five years have made me more determined than ever to stand before you and America and say I will not retreat. I will not surrender. I refuse to be intimidated. I will not ask for permission to exercise my Constitutional rights.

I will not retreat. I will not surrender. I refuse to be intimidated. SP R I NG 2 014

Partisan Warfare

CPI Suggests Shift in Political Alignment

2012 CPI for Hou

2012 CPI fo

118

119

115 116114 113

120

117

D+2 t

R+3 t

R+6 t R+11

D+3 t

D+6 t

by Susan Myrick The Civitas Partisan Index (CPI) has been updated to include 2012 North Carolina voter data. The CPI is not a predictor of future elections, but it is a way to identify which party is favored by voters in any district. Modeled after the Cook Partisan Voting Index for congressional districts, the CPI compares votes cast in each legislative district with votes cast in the state as a whole. The result is a letter (D or R) followed by a number, indicating the extent to which each district leans. For example, a district whose voters allotted 5 more percentage points to the Democratic candidates compared with the state average receives an index score of D+5. The CPI is based on voter data from presidential election year results for governor and other Council of State offices. In 2012, updated legislative districts were applied to the 20

CI V I TA S R E V I E W

D+11

2012 vote for governor and all Council of State races except the attorney generalâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s race, which was uncontested. Though we couldnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t compare individual districts in this CPI to the previous one, because of redistricting, we were able to compare average voting patterns from 2008. While it is true that historically in Council of State races North Carolinians tend to vote for Democratic candidates, in the 2012 CPI we see a possible shift. In the 2008 election, the average Council of State vote (looking at only votes for Democratic or Republican candidates) was 53.4 percent Democratic and 46.6 percent Republican statewide. In the 2012 model, the average vote statewide was nearly even: 50.6 percent Democratic to 49.4 percent Republican. To learn more from the CPI, see the maps on this spread, or go to nccivitas.org/cpi2012.

2012 CPI for Senate

2012 CPI fo

2012 CPI for Senate D

49 50 50

48 49 48

47 47

D+2

D+2 R+3 to R+

R+3 R+6 to R+

R+6 to R+

R+1

R+11 to R

D+3 D+3 to D+

D+6 D+6 to D+

D+11 to D

D+1

use Districts

or House Districts 93

7 50 7274 62 57 59 63 60 7571 31 58 56 29 79 61 40 23 64 84 3449 35 25 30 70 38 81 96 41 11 33 39 77 24 54 36 8 89 26 80 78 95 37 9 97 76 51 1079882 12 28 110108 106 83 53 67 101 99 109 92 100 103 52 10 88 104 102 66 42 43 4 69 45 55 10568 44 48 21 14 22 73

87 86 111

to R+2

to R+5 to R+24

to D+5

to D+10

6 3 13

to R+10

20 19

to D+34

e Districts

or Senate Districts 30

Districts 45

31 30

4231

46 42

44 34

3+2to R+5

6+5to

+10

24 20

25 21

11 to R+18

R+18

3+5to D+5

6+10 to D+10

7 19

R+10

15 18 16 14 17 11

15 18 16 33 14 23 17 29 11 12

28 27 22

28 27

41 36 24 43 38 40 37 39 33 41 36

44 43 38 40 2 to R+2 37 39

3426 32

13 8

D+31

11 to D+31 SP R I NG 2 014

Filed Down 55 Candidates Are Already Winners

118

115 119

116114 117

113

120

by Susan Myrick Nearly half of North Carolina’s legislative races will be decided by the end of Primary Day, May 6. Out of 170 races (120 in the state House and 50 in the state Senate), 55 winners were for all practical purposes decided at close of candidate filing because only one person filed to run for the seat. That includes 22 Republicans and 21 Democrats in the House and eight Republicans and four Democrats in the Senate. In other races, the primary winner is virtually certain to take office because there are no opponents from the other major party who have filed to run. That includes nine Republican and six Democratic primaries in the House, and four Republican and five Democratic primaries in the Senate. So 79 out of the 170 total seats will have been decided before November, with the party breakdown being 43 Republicans and 36 Democrats. To know so many “early” winners for General Assembly is nothing new for North Carolina. The difference this year is that Republicans are in control of a super majority of both legislative houses and are responsible for the newly drawn legislative districts. The maps here further illuminate what these virtual results mean for the political landscape by differentiating between districts where 1) the winner has already been decided due to only one candidate filing to run in the district; 2) the winner will be decided in the primary because only candidates from one party filed to run; 3) races where there will be a primary election before the candidates are decided on to run in the General Election; and 4) contests that are decided in the General Election because only one candidate per political party filed to run in for the particular office. Political mavens may want to turn to the Civitas Partisan Index maps on the preceding pages. The CPI is not a predictor. But in light of who is running where, it can suggest where the parties are evenly matched, and where candidates have advantages or disadvantages because of the district’s historical voting patterns.

2014 State House Conte

Winner Decided - No Ge

Republican Primary Dec

Democratic Primary Dec

Republican Primary with

Democratic Primary with General Election Only

2014 State Senate Contest

Winner Decided - No Genera

Republican Primary Decides

Democratic Primary Decides

Republican Primary with Gen

Democratic Primary with Ge General Election Only

74 73

87 86

111

57 6058 61 70

80 76

82 107 83 108 101106 99 109 92 102 100 103 88 104 105 69 68

110

72 71 75

64 54

31 29 30

eneral or Primary Election Opponent 46

3 13

cides Winner - No General Election Opposition

ests at a Glance

25 40 49 35 34 38 41 11 33 39 36 26 37

20 19

cides Winner - No General Election Opposition

h General Election

26 45

18 24

17 33

46 44 43

ts at a Glance

41 38

39 35

al or Primary Election Opponent

s Winner - No General Election Opposition

neral Election

eneral Eleciton

SP R I NG 2 014

Progressive Par Lessons from the Life of

by Jim Tynen Elsewhere in Civitas Review, Susan Myrick outlines the crucial election of 1898, which sealed North Carolina’s political fate for decades and continues to reverberate today. In Josephus Daniels, His Life & Times, North Carolina State University professor Lee A. Craig tells the revealing story of a key figure in that election. Anyone interested in North Carolina history would enjoy the way the book sheds light on a dark but important era. And today’s self-styled progressives would profit from seeing the destructive contradictions in Daniels’ life and politics. A native of Wilson, N.C., he got into the newspaper business and took over The News & Observer in Raleigh. He made it a dominating news source, but also used its pages to push his own agenda. A hard-working publisher, his greatest talent was as a political operator. He was a businessman whose suc24

CI V I TA S R E V I E W

radoxes Josephus Daniels cess began when he landed the state contract for printing. He had sympathy for the poor and downtrodden – except black people in his home state. With his clout as a newspaper publisher and his skill at backroom wheeling and dealing, Daniels rose to be the real leader of the Democratic Party in the state. But the 1890s saw Democrats pushed aside by the Fusion coalition of Republicans, including black voters, and Populists, often poor white farmers. Daniels saw that this uneasy alliance could be broken up by playing the race card. This wasn’t just a tactical maneuver or mere bigotry: It was the foundation of progressivism’s success. Daniels believed racial strife would derail efforts to build North Carolina. Rather than helping the races learn to live together, however, he and his fellow progressives planned to end turmoil by disenfranchising black voters. The 1898 campaign is known as the “White Supremacy Campaign.” That isn’t a label stuck on it by opponents; it’s what progressive Democrats called it, and Daniels never backed away from the label. Under his direction, the N&O dredged up any sketchy police blotter item or bit of tavern gossip that could fuel

racial enmity. Meanwhile, his political allies crisscrossed the state stoking the fears of white voters. Their tactics worked. The race-baiting attracted enough white Populists’ votes to sweep Democrats back into power. The racial tension climaxed with the deadly Wilmington riot. In a virtual coup d’état, Democrats took over the city and Fusion-backed elected officials were forced to flee for their lives. Democrats regained power statewide, passed the first Jim Crow laws, and drove blacks out of North Carolina political life until the modern civil rights movement. As the real leader of the Democratic Party, Daniels became the most powerful man in North Carolina over the next thirtysome years. Later in life he admitted the campaign was too cruel, but he never abjured its main goals. That’s yet another example of how progressives convince themselves the ends justify the means. In light of current headlines, Craig’s biography reveals more ironies in Daniels’ service as Secretary of the Navy under Woodrow Wilson. In his beliefs, Daniels was close to being a pacifist, and he was opposed to imperialism. But as head of the Navy and Marine Corps, he found himself su-

pervising much gunboat diplomacy, including a quasi-invasion of Mexico. At one point, he was the de facto ruler of Nicaragua, Haiti, the Dominican Republic and Cuba. He wanted the United States to avoid World War I, but he acquiesced in the nation’s entry into the war. He was responsible for building a huge navy and transporting 2 million troops across the Uboat-infested Atlantic just in time to turn the tide of the war. As the last item shows, he was a man of real ability. Nevertheless, the contradictions of his life and progressive beliefs tarnished his legacy. He thought he had high ideals, but implementing them came at a brutal cost for black people. He wanted North Carolina to thrive, but it never became truly prosperous until it threw off the racial segregation he helped bring about. His drive and political skill made him Secretary of the Navy, but White House politics and the geopolitical facts led him to violate his beliefs by supporting heavy-handed imperialism and entry into the greatest war in history up to that point. His career should stand as a dire warning to modern liberals and the dangers of progressivism’s own contradictions. Liberalism in its way has had successes – but at what price? And if modern progressives’ goals are threatened, who would they be willing to sacrifice to achieve those goals? Can progressivism maintain its ideals in the nitty-gritty reality of our world? Readers of Craig’s fascinating book should heed the lessons of Josephus Daniels’ life and times. ———— Josephus Daniels: His Life & Times, by Lee A. Craig, The University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, 2013, 415 pages. SP R I NG 2 014

Jump Start

North Carolina’s 2013 in One Chart by Civitas Staff A lot can be said about 2013 in North Carolina – and one way to sum it up is the chart on this page. It shows the marked drop in the state unemployment rate, both in itself and in relation to the national economy. In January, North Carolina had a seasonally adjusted unemployment rate of 9.5 percent, far worse than the national unemployment rate of 7.9 percent. But our rate plummeted over the course of the year. By December, the NC unemployment rate was 6.9 percent – only a tad higher than the national unemployment rate of 6.7 percent. The plunge in the state unemployment rate during the year was the largest in the nation, according to the federal Bureau of Labor Statistics. Note the drop really began in July. That month, only two states had higher rates of unemployment than North Carolina. By December North Carolina had lower unemployment than 17 other states. Mmm, what happened in July? For one thing, federal extended unemployment benefits ended. The majority in the General Assembly reformed North Carolina’s unemployment insurance program in large part to hasten the repayment of nearly $3 billion of funds borrowed from the federal government. The Tar Heel State, like many others, had to borrow billions to cover heavy demands 26

CI V I TA S R E V I E W

North Carolina Unemployment -‐ 2013 10.0% 9.5%

9.0%

Unemployment Reform Implemented in NC

8.5% 8.0%

7.5% 7.0% 6.5% 6.0%

Jan-‐13 Feb-‐13 Mar-‐13 Apr-‐13 May-‐13 Jun-‐13 Jul-‐13 Aug-‐13 Sep-‐13 Oct-‐13 Nov-‐13 Dec-‐13

for UI benefits during the recession. Without reform, state businesses would have been dealt crushing UI tax hikes and interest charges would have totaled millions more. The reform, however, meant the state was no longer eligible for extended federal UI benefits. Critics claimed the reforms would devastate the unemployed and harm NC’s economy, but the opposite happened. Our conclusion is that when people were no longer being paid for not working, they went to work. Other explanations are possible. In 2013, the General Assembly took a more conservative tilt, and Republican Pat McCrory replaced liberal Democrat Bev Perdue as governor. By July, the legislature had passed key pieces of legislation, including a

relatively restrained budget, income tax reform and a plan to begin cutting red tape. It could well be that by July businesses were encouraged by these steps and increased their hiring. Or maybe the mere appearance of a business-friendly administration and legislature at long last was enough to spark the state’s economy by mid-summer. Economists and policy wonks have been debating the figures, and surely that debate will go on. In the end, however, the debate should begin with this chart. Look at it again. By July the new state government had begun to make good on conservative campaign promises. Starting that month, North Carolina’s unemployment situation definitely and steadily improved. Coincidence? You be the judge.

RACIST ROOTS CONTINUED

FROM

PAGE

State races, North Carolinians tend to vote for Democratic candidates, in the 2012 CPI we see a possible shift in that voting pattern. The liberal Left (and that always includes the mainstream media) is adept in defining the Right, whether it’s labeling the tea party as racists or charging that conservatives are waging war on women. History and the facts belie the liberal Left’s rhetoric concerning the workings and the history of the progressive movement in North Carolina. We only have to glance at history to get a clear picture of how progressives reacted when they lost power for a short time in the 19th century. It should be no surprise that they would react with such vitriol in the 21st.

D.C. Discontent CONTINUED

FROM

PAGE

economy was probably a major contributor to President Obama’s losing NC in 2012 after winning it in 2008. Even though things are better, they are not good enough to remove the insecurity people feel. Along with the recession question, we always ask a right track/ wrong track question about the state. This too has been in negative territory since the start of the recession. In our January 2014 poll, 60 percent said North Carolina was headed in

the wrong direction, but this is still better than the 66 percent of the same voters who think the country is headed in the wrong direction. If we look back to October 2013, we see a dramatic gap of 75 percent of voters in NC thinking the country as a whole was headed in the wrong direction, while only 50 percent thought NC was headed in the wrong direction. Voters make a distinction between the federal level and the state level. And for the most part they really don’t like what is happening at the federal level. Saying they are paying attention to national issues is not just conjecture. In December 2013 we asked them: “Thinking ahead to the 2014 election, in general which issues are you more concerned with … (?)” They chose federal over state issues by 47 to 32 percent. This number is especially important with the unaffiliated and undecided voters on the generic legislative ballot. Unaffiliated voters say they will vote on federal over state issues by a 55 to 25 percent majority and undecided voters say they will look at federal over state issues by a 37 to 33 percent margin. Comparing polling at the same point in the last three midterm election cycles (2006, 2010, 2014) gives

an indication of where things are heading. On the generic (just asking the party preference ) state legislative ballot polling in January of each year we find: in 2006, a 39-35 percent advantage for Democrats; 2010 we find a 41-39 percent advantage for Republicans; and this year we find a 39-39 percent tie in the generic ballot. In January 2014, when we further asked how they will vote for U.S. Congress, regardless of how they will vote at the state level, the numbers are 44-40 percent in favor of the Republican candidate. These poll numbers point to an election in keeping with past trends. Elections usually flow in the direction of the general mood and all of our numbers are pointing in the same direction. But it should be remembered that elections are ultimately about individual candidates. How good a candidate is and how good a campaign he or she runs does matter. Keep this in mind and be looking for more Civitas polling as 2014 progresses. ———— Just about every month Civitas polls registered voters in our state to determine their attitudes and opinions. These polls survey 600 registered voters and have a margin of error of +/- 4 percent. 25 percent of the calls are to cell phone-only households.

To find out what North Carolina voters are thinking, attend our next

Civitas Poll Presentation Thursday, April 24, 11:30 a.m. to 1 p.m. Raleigh Marriott Crabtree Valley

nccivitas.org/poll-lunch

919-834-2099 SP R I NG 2 014

America, We Can Do Better

by Gov. Bobby Jindal In Washington, facts can sometimes be stubborn things. I guess that’s why some media pundits thought my comments at a governors’ association meeting in February – which highlighted the slow growth and failed economic policies of our president – impolitic or impolite. But let’s look at the facts. According to Federal Reserve data, our current economic “recovery” is the slowest since World War II. After the deep recession of the 1980s, economic growth exceeded 4 percent for three straight years – and in 1984 topped 7 percent. But our economy has yet 28

CI V I TA S R E V I E W

to grow even 3 percent per year under this president. True, the unemployment rate has declined. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, however, the labor force declined by more than 200,000 workers in the past year, even though the pool of potential workers has grown by nearly 2.3 million. That means the unemployment rate declined only because more people left the labor force. How is this a recovery? If the status quo wasn’t bad enough, the president’s policies are making the economy even worse. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) recently concluded that Obamacare would result in more than 2 million Americans working fewer hours, or leaving the labor force altogether. At a time when the labor force participation rate is near 36-year lows, Obamacare is further reducing the size of the workforce. And – believe it or not – Democrats applauded this outcome! There’s more. The CBO also released another report finding that the president’s proposed minimum wage increase could cause as many as 1 million Americans to lose their jobs. Sadly, for these workers, President Obama’s minimum-wage economy could turn into the zero-wage economy, as small businesses lay workers off to pay the cost of these new government mandates. Given this record of poor growth – and the potential harm yet to come – who wouldn’t take the opportunity to ask the president to change course? The truly impolite thing would have been for me to remain silent and consign millions of hard working Americans to their fate. One of my fellow governors called my description of the Obama economy “insane.” I guess it’s appro-

priate he said that while at the White House, because only in Washington – where government largesse has created some of the wealthiest communities in our entire nation – would Americans think that these anemic economic figures represent true growth. Call me crazy, but I believe the truly insane idea is thinking that we can grow the economy through policies that put Americans out of work. The fact is, we can do better. We can grow our economy faster, improve our health care system, explore new sources of energy, and put more Americans back to work. President Obama can use his infamous “pen and phone” strategy to get started on all these areas today. Recently, I outlined 10 places for the Administration to start. But if President Obama won’t lead, then conservatives must show the

have positive solutions on health care – that harnessing innovation and state flexibility can help bring down health costs, without trillions of dollars in new taxes and spending. It means explaining how our untapped energy resources can create high-quality, wellpaying jobs, not just in energy, but in manufacturing and other fields. It means empowering parents and students – not teachers’ unions – with the choice of quality schools for children to learn the tools they need to succeed in today’s economy. I firmly believe that President Obama’s policies are failing our economy, and I won’t be afraid to say so. But I just as firmly believe that as conservatives we have an obligation to put forward our own plans about how we can turn our country around. Our country can do better, and under a conservative vision of reform, we will.

President Obama has said “I’ve got a pen and I’ve got a phone” to issue executive orders advancing his agenda.

American people a better way. And to do so, we first must win the battle of ideas. Winning the battle of ideas means outlining to the American people how conservative policies can improve their lives. It means telling them that we

———— Bobby Jindal is the Governor of Louisiana. This article is adapted from a piece that appeared on the Heritage Foundation’s conservative policy blog The Foundry, at blog. heritage.org. Civitas thanks the Heritage Foundation for permission to print it here.

100 S Harrington St. Raleigh, NC 27603

Pass the Torch. Donate. Your tax-deductible gift can boost NC!

Your generous donations enable us to educate and empower the people of North Carolina. That mission has never been more important, for now there is an opportunity to build a durable conservative foundation for the stateâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s future. Through My check made payable to The Civitas Institute is enclosed training, polling, research, Please charge my: outreach and much more, the American Express Master Card Discover Visa Civitas Institute can help the Name___________________________________________________________ Tar Heel State achieve greater Address _________________________________________________________ prosperity and freedom. City ____________________________

To help us reach as many people as possible in this crucial time, please consider donating today.

Phone _________________________

State _______

Zip ______________

Email __________________________

Card No. Amount: $____________

Expiration: ___ ___ / ___ ___

CVV _______

Signature: _______________________________________________________ All contributions are tax deductible If you prefer to make your contribution over the phone, please call (919) 834-2099 Donate online at www.NCCivitas.org/Donate

Mail the form on this page to: Development Office, Civitas Institute, 100 S. Harrington St., Raleigh, NC 27603