New poll shows strong support for election reform and concerns about casino gambling, fracking, hospital practices, repeal of consumer protections and impact of Amendment One.

With state lawmakers returning to Raleightomorrow afternoon to begin the 2012 legislative session, NC Policy Watch is happy to announce the release of the latest edition of its Carolina Issues Poll. This month’s poll quizzed 600 voters throughout the state between May 11 and 13 with respect to their attitudes on a host of timely issues that figure to be on the front burner at the General Assembly in coming weeks. Questions in the poll were developed by Policy Watch staff and then vetted and posed to registered voters by the nationally recognized, Raleigh-based polling firm Public Policy Polling. The poll has a margin of error of +/- 4%.

Here are the results:

In keeping with similar results elsewhere, North Carolina votes expressed significant support for moving away from the state’s hyper-partisan legislative redistricting process and strong concerns about the flood of “Super Pac” money that has been inundating the electoral process.

Q1 Under current law, state legislators are responsible for drawing the maps of the districts that they and members of congress represent and in which they stand for election. Do you support or oppose a proposal advanced by election law reform groups that would turn this job over to an independent, nonpartisan commission?

Support ………………………………………………….. 47%

Oppose ………………………………………………….. 27%

Not sure …………………………………………………. 26%

Q2 In 2010, the United States Supreme Court ruled that corporations, unions, and wealthy individuals can spend unlimited amounts of money to directly influence the outcome of elections without disclosing it to the public. Since then, more and more candidates are relying upon so-called “Super PACs” funded by such groups and individuals to fund their campaigns. Do you think this is good or bad for our state?

Good idea ………………………………………………. 10%

Bad idea…………………………………………………. 82%

Not sure …………………………………………………. 8%

Another issue that the General Assembly seems likely to consider during the short session is gambling. According to legislative leaders, lawmakers will consider a bill that would ratify an agreement with the Cherokee Tribe to bring casino-style gambling to the Western North Carolina. A proposal to deal with the state’s ongoing controversy surrounding video poker and “sweepstakes” machines may also be on the table. On these issues, voters have real concerns.

Q3 North Carolina has long prohibited casino-style gambling with live dealers in the state. Large, out-of-state gambling corporations would like to change this, however, and are lobbying state officials and the Cherokee tribe to introduce casino gambling for the first time. Do you support or oppose the introduction of casino-style gambling?

Support ………………………………………………….. 38%

Oppose ………………………………………………….. 53%

Not sure …………………………………………………. 9%

Q4 Another controversy related to gambling centers around the video poker and so-called “sweepstakes” machines. Do you think the state should or should not be able to ban such machines in order to protect public health and safety?

NC should be able to ban them …………………. 55%

NC should not …………………………………………. 37%

Not sure …………………………………………………. 9%

A major controversy that has arisen in North Carolina policy circles in recent weeks concerns the issue of nonprofit hospital practices. A week-long series of reports coauthored by reporters for Raleigh’s News & Observer and the Charlotte Observer revealed, among other things, that many large, nonprofit hospitals with charity care policies have not informed their patients of the existence of these policies. Many have also continued to use aggressive debt collection practices in pursuing old debts, including placing liens on people’s homes. The new poll shows that voters strongly disapprove of both practices.

Q5 Currently, every nonprofit hospital inNorth Carolina has a policy that spells out who is entitled to free or reduced-price care if they are too poor to pay their bill. Many of these hospitals, however, do not inform all patients of these policies. Do you think that hospitals should be required to inform all patients of their policies for free and reduced-price care, or not?

Hospitals should be required to inform all patients of their policies for free and reduced price care……………………………………………………….81%

They should not …………………………………….. 12%

Not sure …………………………………………………. 7%

Q6 Current law allows hospitals to place liens on the homes of people who are unable to pay their hospital bills. This can make it impossible for the homeowner to sell or refinance, and can lead to foreclosure. Do you think hospitals should be able to place liens on the homes of people who are unable to pay their hospital bills, or not?

Hospitals should be able to……………………….. 14%

They should not ………………………………………. 77%

Not sure …………………………………………………. 9%

On another timely health care issue, voters of all stripes voiced strong support for retaining two key components of the Affordable Care Act – the federal health care reform law sometimes referred to as “Obamacare.”

Q7 Under the federal health care reform law known as the Affordable Care Act, insurance companies can no longer deny coverage to children with pre-existing conditions, and parents may enroll their children in their family coverage until they reach age 26. Opponents of the law want to repeal these protections. Do you think these protections should be repealed, or not?

They should be repealed ………………………….. 24%

They should not ………………………………………. 65%

Not sure …………………………………………………. 11%

Last year in the General Assembly, industry lobbyists succeeding in advancing a bill though the House of Representatives that would repeal key provisions of a 2010 law known as the Homeowner and Homebuyer Protection Act. The bill, which is pending in the Senate, would severely limit protections against abusive practices found in foreclosure “rescue,” “lease with option to buy” and “contract for deed” transactions. Voters have grave concern about repealing these consumer protections.

Q8 In 2010,North Carolina adopted new laws designed to protect vulnerable homebuyers and homeowners from businesses who convince people to sign over the titles to their homes without any upfront payments. Businesses engaged in this industry claim the rules are too burdensome are now lobbying state lawmakers to repeal these consumer protections. Do you think these protections should be repealed, or not?

They should be repealed ………………………….. 17%

They should not ………………………………………. 55%

Not sure …………………………………………………. 28%

Yet another issue likely to be taken up by lawmakers in the coming weeks is fracking – the controversial procedure under which water and chemicals are injected underground to free up natural gas deposits. Here again, voters support a cautious approach.

Q9 Fracking is a controversial practice in which large amounts of water and chemicals are pumped underground under high pressure to unlock natural gas deposits. Opponents worry about a number of serious potential impacts on nearby communities and the environment. Supporters say these concerns are overblown. Do you thinkNorth Carolina should legalize fracking now or wait for more health and safety studies before proceeding?

NC should legalize fracking now………………… 31%

NC should wait for more health and safety studies………….63%

Not sure …………………………………………………. 6%

Finally, in the aftermath of the recent passage of a state constitutional amendment banning same sex marriage, there is new evidence that voters failed to understand the full impact of their action. When asked whether they thought it a good change that cities providing health insurance coverage to unmarried couples would likely have to halt the practice, a narrow plurality sad “no.” This result stands in sharp contrast to the final 61-39 approval that the measure received at the polls.

Q10 Now thatNorth Carolina has adopted a constitutional amendment banning state recognition of “any domestic legal union” other than a marriage between a man and a woman, employees of some cities may no longer be able to get health insurance coverage for their unmarried partners. Do you think this is a good change or a bad one?

Good change ………………………………………….. 43%

Bad change…………………………………………….. 44%

Not sure …………………………………………………. 13% 

To read the entire poll, as well as the crosstabs, click here.

The General Assembly will soon put together their FY2012-13 continuation budget, in which lawmakers make changes to the second year of the biennial state budget that was passed in the spring of 2011. Any changes to the state budget are based on the availability of revenue (whether there is more or less than expected) and other policy considerations. Since the current-law state budget functions as the starting point for legislators, the N.C. Budget and Tax Center compiled the following facts about budget decisions made last spring that lawmakers could choose to reconsider.

—Text and chart: Brenna Burch, Public Policy Analyst, NC Budget and Tax Center

Sources:

Spending cuts are based on NC Budget & Tax Center calculations and data in the FY2011-2013 Final Budget (http://www.ncleg.net/fiscalresearch/). Revenue options are based on NC Budget & Tax Center calculations, data provided by the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy (ITEP), and the NC Department of Revenue’s Biennial Tax Expenditure Report, 2009 (http://www.dornc.com/publications/nc_tax_expenditure_report_09.pdf).

As the last federal recovery funds supporting public education in North Carolina run out, a larger share of responsibility for funding public education must shift back to state government, says a new report. In accepting this responsibility, lawmakers must recommit to maintaining and increasing the capacity of North Carolina’s schools to fairly and adequately serve its growing K-12 student population.

Personal income tax is integral to supporting the state’s investment in public schools, public safety agencies, public health programs, and infrastructure development, according to a report released this morning.

North Carolina’s personal income tax represents half of the revenue collected by the state each year – $10 billion in 2011 – according to a new report from the Budget & Tax Center, a project of the North Carolina Justice Center. North Carolina’s reliance on the personal income tax has yielded state revenues that have kept better pace with the growth of the economy as well as residents’ incomes, the report said, contributing to long-term adequacy of the state revenue system and enabling North Carolina to better meet fast-growing demand for public investments and services.

Personal income tax is also critical for bringing the state’s revenue system closer to fulfilling the three primary principles of a responsible, modern revenue system – equity, adequacy, and stability.

Recent discussions of revenue modernization have included proposals to reform personal income tax, with lawmakers suggesting eliminating the personal income tax or replacing the current progressive income tax with a flat personal income tax. They’ve expressed concern that relying on the personal income tax could impede economic growth or encourage wealthier residents to move out of the state. However, the report said, research has found no statistical relationship between a state’s reliance on progressive taxes and measures of economic growth, and actually discovered that of the nine states that have adopted a personal income tax since the 1950s, six have seen higher income growth than the national average.

“The personal income tax ensures that state revenues can keep pace with economy growth and demand for public investments, and better aligns North Carolinians’ state and local tax contributions with families’ ability to pay,” said Alexandra Forter Sirota, director of the BTC and author of the report.

Better reform options exist that would align the state’s revenue system with key principles for modernization: equity, adequacy and stability. Broadening the personal income tax base to adjusted gross income (AGI) and creating a more progressive rate structure would both be crucial steps in reforming the state personal income tax, the report said, and could make it so that the system no longer asks for greater contributions as a share of income from those with the least to spare.

“Reforms to the personal income tax are certainly needed, but they should be done in a way that supports comprehensive revenue modernization and, in so doing, ensure that North Carolina is positioned to invest in economic opportunity for all,” Sirota said.

Recent considerations by the NC General Assembly’s House Select Committee on Early Childhood Education Improvement to explore privatizing North Carolina’s Pre-K program could severely limit access to the program in rural, high-poverty areas, a new report cautions.

Using county-level data on the location of Pre-K program slots, rural and urban designations of counties, and poverty and child poverty rates, a report by the NC Budget & Tax Center – a project of the NC Justice Center – finds that a majority (58) of North Carolina’s counties rely on public schools to host and manage more than half of their Pre-K slots. Data reveals that only 6 of these counties are not rural.

Moreover, 17 counties – Alleghany, Bertie, Bladen, Clay, Dare, Gates, Halifax, Hertford, Hyde, Jones, Moore, Perquimans, Polk, Tyrrell, Warren, Washington, and Watauga – rely exclusively (or 100%) on public schools to house their Pre-K program slots. All 17 of these counties are rural and a majority of them of are also high-poverty.

“It is not a coincidence that public schools play such a key role in providing infrastructure for Pre-K classrooms in rural, impoverished counties,” notes Louisa Warren, Policy Advocate with the NC Budget & Tax Center and author of the report. “Unfortunately, these counties often don’t have an extensive network of high-quality private child care providers, and public schools are essential to making Pre-K an accessible opportunity in these communities.”

The report includes a county-by-county table that’s a quick reference for the number of Pre-K slots, the percentage of slots in public schools, and poverty and child poverty rates.

“What’s clear from this data is that prohibiting public schools from managing and hosting Pre-K slots could have a disproportionate impact on rural, high?poverty counties in the state,” Warren said. “Privatization could mean a majority of North Carolina’s counties would have limited access to Pre-K, negatively affecting children’s education in the short and long terms.”

To read the full report, click here.

In recent days, a marketing campaign launched by the Pope Civitas Institute and the Americans for Prosperity Foundation began claiming that last year’s state budget – which cut taxes on the wealthiest while slashing funds for vital public investments – actually increased teacher positions in North Carolina.

The following facts from the NC Budget & Tax Center are designed to help all North Carolinians understand the issues surrounding the budget as well as the numbers behind the budget claims.

The budget – no matter how one looks at it – did not add teacher positions to North Carolina’s schools. It resulted in the loss of 915 teacher and 2,042 teaching assistant positions, directly impacting students experience in the classroom.ⁱ At a minimum, we estimate that 19,215 students, based on average class size, were impacted by policymakers’ failure to fund classroom instruction.ⁱⁱ

But what about the line items that funded more than 1,000 teachers this year? One line item in the state budget appropriated $61 million for 1,124 teacher positions. Another appropriated $55 million for enrollment growth (“ADM Adjustment”) in 2011-12. These were cancelled out by a separate line item that cut over $124 million in state aid to Local Education Authorities – an accounting maneuver that resulted in historically low state funding for public schools despite record-high enrollment.ⁱⁱⁱ

The change in the number of “state funded” teacher positions from last school year to this school year masks the overall loss of 915 teachers. Teacher positions are funded by federal, state and local sources. During the Great Recession, federal dollars were provided to states to fund teacher positions and ensure that our children’s education was not disrupted significantly by the economic downturn. When some of those dollars expired at the end of last fiscal year, state policymakers took back responsibility for funding some positions with state dollars – but not enough to avoid significant net position losses. Since 2009, North Carolina has received and spent nearly $1.6 billion in federal funds to continue operating our public schools, keeping the lights on and the heat running as well as keeping educators at work in the classroom. Even with federal recovery funds standing in for state appropriations, since the start of the Great Recession, 16,678 public school positions have been eliminated.^iv

It’s going to get worse. Next year North Carolina will lose more than $250 million in federal EduJobs funding. As the last source of federal money for education in NC dries up, a further 5,000 currently funded positions are at risk for elimination if policymakers do not re-commit to adequately funding North Carolina’s classrooms with state dollars.^v

The budget passed was out of balance. The state budget used one-time money to pay for recurring obligations and relied on unrealistic anticipated savings while further cutting into available resources by cutting taxes. The 2011-2013 budget pays for more than $750 million in recurring obligations – like public school teachers – with one-time money in this year alone,^vi but the budget impacts extend beyond the classroom. This year’s budget shorted the Medicaid program by $149 million dollars, anticipating savings that at the time were deemed unrealistic and that by the fall had already created a current year shortfall.^vii The result has left NC’s health providers and most vulnerable residents wondering how their services, and claims, will be paid when the Medicaid program literally runs out of money in May.^viii While revenue collections have been coming in ahead of target that is not the same as a revenue surplus. Even if it was, the $140 million ahead of target at current time isn’t even enough to meet current-year obligations, let alone increase availability for next year’s budget.^ix

By failing to mend North Carolina’s outdated tax system, policymakers have not addressed the fundamental challenges to the state’s long-term budget outlook. Instead, policymakers enacted tax cuts in the budget that benefit the wealthiest North Carolinians and businesses at the expense of moderate- and low-income families. Two examples: Discontinuing the higher personal income tax surcharge and the tax surcharge^x on profitable corporations put $200 million per year into the pockets of the wealthiest North Carolinians and profitable businesses; and legislative leaders gave away more than $467 million over the biennium to businesses in the form of a $50,000 business tax exemption.

Next school year, North Carolina stands to lose thousands more educators and public school personnel unless appropriate action is taken. Doing so will require policymakers to raise revenue in a way that moves North Carolina forward towards an adequate and equitable tax system that supports economic opportunity and prosperity for all.

FOOTNOTES

i North Carolina Public Schools, Statistical Abstract: Table 16, State Summary of Public School Full-Time Personnel for School Year 2011-12 and School Year 2010-11. Available at http://apps.schools.nc.gov/pls/apex/f?p=1:21:0::NO:::

ii BTC calculation of direct student impact of 2011-12 staffing loss assuming the current state average student to teacher ratio of 1:21 as reported on page 13 of “Highlights of the North Carolina Public School Budget, February 2012,” Information Analysis, Division of School Business, North Carolina Department of Public Instruction. Available at http://www.ncpublicschools.org/docs/fbs/resources/data/highlights/2012highlights.pdf

iii North Carolina General Assembly, Fiscal Research Division. “2011 ANNOTATED COMMITTEE REPORT ON THE CONTINUATION, EXPANSION AND CAPITAL BUDGET,” Section F, Public Education: lines 1-5 (page F-1). Available at http://ncleg.net/fiscalresearch/highlights/highlights_pdfs/2011_Annotated_Committee_Report_2012-02-23_FINAL.pdf

iv McLenaghan, Edwin. “North Carolina’s Disappearing Educators.” N.C. Budget and Tax Center: September 2011. Available at http://

www.ncjustice.org/?q=node/956

v Ibid

vi Burch, Brenna, and McLenaghan, Edwin. “The 2011-2013 Final Budget – Neglecting a Balanced Approach, Budget Costs Jobs and Delays Economic Recovery,” N.C. Budget and Tax Center: June 2011. Available at http://ncjustice.org/?q=node/889

vii Burch, Brenna. “Numbers come out on Medicaid shortfall for FY2011-12.” Available at http://pulse.ncpolicywatch.org/2012/01/20/numbers-come-out-on-medicaid-shortfall-for-fy2012-13/

viii Burch, Brenna. “Cutting it close on Medicaid.” Available at http://pulse.ncpolicywatch.org/2012/01/25/cutting-it-close-on-medicaid/

ix McLenaghan, Edwin. “Putting the Mid-Year “Surplus” in State Revenues in Context.” Available at http://pulse.ncpolicywatch.org/2012/01/11/putting-the-mid-year-surplus-in-state-revenues-in-context/

x Sirota, Alexandra Forter. “The Oft-Ignored Part of the Temporary Tax Package – Continuing High-Income and Corporate Surcharges Would Raise Needed Revenue and Support Economic Recovery.” N.C. Budget and Tax Center: May 2011. Available at http://www.ncjustice.org/?q=node/853

North Carolina’s Pre-K program and its “at-risk” income eligibility standard

The following media release accompanied a new report released this morning by the N.C. Budget and Tax Center:

MEDIA RELEASE: Legislative changes would limit at-risk children’s access to NC Pre-K, harm economy in the long-run

Lowering income eligibility threshold of NC Pre-K would leave out thousands of low-income children and move would be out of step with other states, report finds

This morning, the NC House Select Committee on Early Childhood Education Improvement is expected to vote on a proposal that could change the administration of and accessibility to North Carolina’s Pre-K program, including by lowering the “at-risk” income eligibility for children and their families seeking enrollment in NC Pre-K.

Lowering the income eligibility threshold of NC Pre-K would directly and negatively impact North Carolina’s children and economy down the road, according to a report released this morning by the Budget & Tax Center, a project of the NC Justice Center. Legislators are expected to consider changes that would lower the “at-risk” eligibility standard to 100% of the federal poverty line. Under such rules, at least 9,700 children currently enrolled in NC Pre-K would no longer meet the financial requirements for the program, the report finds.

“Free prekindergarten is essential if we want to give four year olds a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity that yields incredible and lasting impacts on children’s learning outcomes, earning power down the road, and economic impacts on our communities,” said Louisa Warren, policy advocate with the BTC and author of the report. “For many of North Carolina’s families, early education programs are prohibitively expensive, impacting children’s access to early learning opportunities in the short-term and their earning power in the long-term.”

The report examines the question of who is poor in North Carolina and what levels of income make it hard to make ends meet using a measure called the Living Income Standard (LIS), a market-based and localized approach to measuring economic hardship. The Living Income Standard finds that it takes an annual income equivalent to 238% of the federal poverty level to afford basic expenses for a family of one parent and one child – more than double than that of the draft recommendations for the new NC Pre-K income eligibility threshold – with child care representing 25% of that family’s budget. Families making below the LIS cannot pay for necessities like food, housing, health care, transportation or child care without relying on debt income or assistance. For a family of three at the new potential NC Pre-K income eligibility threshold – 100% of the federal poverty level (earning $18,530 annually) – child care can eat up to 40% of their income.

“The Living Income Standard tells us that families earning below that standard in North Carolina – more than double the federal poverty level – walk a tenuous tightrope in trying to keep food on the table, roofs over their head and bills paid,” Warren added. “Items like quality early education can become an unaffordable luxury.”

The report also finds that North Carolina is becoming an outlier in trying to narrow the reach of its prekindergarten program. In fact, many states are moving to universal or near-universal programs. North Carolina’s Southern neighbors Florida and West Virginia have state-funded universal preschool education programs, and Kentucky, Tennessee, and Louisiana all serve children in their preschool education programs who reside in families with incomes up to 200% of the federal poverty level.

Because NC Pre-K’s current “at-risk” eligibility threshold is inclusive of a broader range of children in households experiencing economic hardship with incomes above the flawed federal poverty level, it has the greatest potential to improve the earnings for more North Carolinians and strengthen the economy, the report noted.

“Prekindergarten programs like NC Pre-K have been proven to increase children’s earnings down the road and produce cost savings in reduced crime, special education services, a higher-skilled workforce and other benefits,” Warren concluded. “Investing in early education is one of the most important things we can do to move our state forward and given the prohibitive cost of early learning opportunities, we should make it available to all low-income children facing hardship.”

Warren will be at the NC House Select Committee this morning and available for comment on this report as well as any action taken at the committee.

The report is available here: http://www.ncjustice.org/?q=node/1173

FOR MORE INFORMATION CONTACT: Louisa Warren, Senior Policy Advocate, (919) 801-0465, Louisa@ncjustice.org; Jeff Shaw, Director of Communications, 503-551-3615, jeff@ncjustice.org.

North Carolina’s public structures and systems – such as its public schools, courts, and parks – have been badly damaged by the Great Recession, high unemployment, and an outdated revenue system, according to a new report released Thursday morning. Without a strategy to improve revenue collections, the state’s public investments in education, health, and safe communities will fall short of what is needed to sustain a high quality of life and a prosperous economy.

The Great Recession caused the deepest decline in state tax revenues in more than half a century, and although revenues have made a modest recovery in recent months, they are still far below their historical levels. According to the new report by the Budget & Tax Center  the economic downturn and high unemployment have been the primary factors driving revenues to such low levels, but North Carolina’s outdated and increasingly inadequate revenue system also shoulders some of the blame.

It’s impossible for the state to educate students, train workers, and keep communities healthy without adequate revenue, the report said. Although state policymakers responded to the initial recession-driven collapse in state revenues with a balanced approach of targeted spending cuts and additional revenues in 2009, they have taken a harmful cuts-only approach to dealing with diminished revenues and growing demand for education, health care, and other core public services.

The report suggests that policymakers consider five strategies to improve revenue collections that would also push North Carolina towards a modernized revenue system. Taken together, these strategies could raise more than $1.5 billion in additional revenue through:

• Capping tax subsidies that primarily benefit wealthy households
• Reinstating the temporary 1-cent sales tax and doubling the value of the state’s Earned Income Tax Credit
• Extending the sales tax to services where most service providers already collect and remit sales tax on some purchases
• Requiring multi-state corporations to pay taxes on all profits earned in North Carolina
• Adding a new top bracket to North Carolina’s income tax

Pursing all of these strategies would not make up for the billions in cumulative cuts to the state’s public investments during the Great Recession, said Edwin McLenaghan, a public policy analyst with the BTC and co-author of the report. However, they would help address the revenue challenges North Carolina will continue to face without action by state policymakers.

“In a time of persistent economic insecurity and challenging economic transitions for North Carolina’s families and businesses, now is an especially important time for North Carolina’s policymakers to strengthen the public structures and systems that will promote a future of shared prosperity and economic security for all North Carolinians,” McLenaghan said.

You can read the full report here.

North Carolina’s rural communities are far more susceptible to the impact of state and federal budget decisions, according to a new report released Friday morning.

Rural counties are significantly less well-positioned their urban counterparts to fund core governmental operations, according to a report by the Budget & Tax Center – a project of the North Carolina Justice Center – particularly during times of austerity budgeting at the state and federal level. They exhibit troubling signs of more widespread economic hardship than urban counties, with a high share of residents living in poverty, without any form of public or private health insurance, and lower overall wealth.

Due to widespread economic hardship, low or negative average population growth, and a higher reliance on intergovernmental revenues, North Carolina’s rural counties are more sensitive to changes in state and federal revenue and expenditure decisions than higher-wealth, faster-growing urban counties, the report said, because they are constrained in the tools, like revenue, available to them. Any decline in external funding to county government during the state’s slow economic recovery could create a budget gap that could directly impact lower-wealth counties. Such a gap would be difficult to bridge without cutting or eliminating local jobs and core services that support the county’s most vulnerable residents.

Local governments play a critical role in the quality of life of individuals and families by delivering public services and investing in community development, but such investments have been declining due to state budget cuts and shrinking tax revenues, the report said. The weakened economic conditions in rural counties will only worsen if state lawmakers continue to take a cuts-only approach to state budgeting.

“Choices made at the state level will continue to impact local communities, and those impacts should be considered when deciding how to move North Carolina forward,” said Brenna Burch, a public policy analyst with the Budget & Tax Center and author of the report. “An adequate, stable and fair revenue system will allow state and local governments alike to meet the needs of individuals and families during both good and bad times, forging a pathway towards greater prosperity for all.”

To read the full BTC REPORT: Tough Times in Small Places, click here.

The coming political year: What will happen? What should happen?

It looks like 2012 is going to be one heck of a year in North Carolina politics and public policy — maybe one for the ages.

Between Governor Perdue’s decision not to seek a second term, the General Assembly’s “midnight madness” fiasco, a statewide vote on a constitutional amendment to restrict marriage, a presidential primary, a court fight over redistricting, a legislative “short session,” chronic economic and fiscal crises,  and the most aggressively reactionary state legislature in decades, it’s hard to imagine how things could be much crazier.

So what does public opinion tells us is going to happen? What ought to happen?

Don’t miss a chance to gather some answers to these questions from two of the state’s leading experts. Join us at noon on Thursday, February 2, for a Crucial Conversation lunch featuring: Tom Jensen and Chris Fitzsimon.

Tom Jensen is the Director of the nationally recognized polling firm, Public Policy Polling and oversees its day to day operations. During his time at PPP he has been a frequent guest for television and radio stations across the region, and has been called on for expert analysis by publications including The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, The Christian Science Monitor, and U.S. News and World Report. He writes PPP’s blog and Twitter account in addition to crafting the content for most of its surveys.

Chris Fitzsimon is the Director of N.C. Policy Watch and North Carolina’s leading progressive media personality. Chris is a veteran journalist and nonprofit leader whose daily commentaries are heard on radio and read online throughout North Carolina.

Don’t miss the opportunity to hear from these two experts at this critical time.

When: Thursday February 2 – Box lunches will be available at 11:30 a.m. and the program will start at 12:00 noon.

Where: Marbles Kids Museum 210 E. Hargett St. in downtown Raleigh. Click here for directions and information about convenient parking options.

Cost: $10 – includes a box lunch. Space is limited – pre-registration required.

Click here to register for this event

Questions?? Contact Rob Schofield at 919-861-2065 or rob@ncpolicywatch.com.