- [Narrator] House and Senate Republicans reach a casino-free deal on a state budget bill.

This is "State Lines."

- [Narrator] Quality public television is made possible through the financial contributions of viewers like you.

We invite you to join them in supporting PBS NC.

[upbeat music] ♪ - Welcome back to "State Lines."

I'm Kelly McCullen.

Joining me today on an electric set, former North Carolina Attorney General Rufus Edmisten.

To his right, Wake County representative Sarah Crawford, Representative Jason Saine of Lincoln County, and public relations consultant Pat Ryan occupying chair number four.

Hello everyone.

It's been a late night for some of us.

Rufus, some of them.

Well, I've got a good night sleep.

- I did too.

How about you, Pat?

- Eh, I've got two kids, so it's never really a good night's sleep.

- I will not even ask them what kind of night they had.

It's been a long week for legislators whether you're a Democrat or a Republican.

But the North Carolina House and Senate have approved a 2023, 2024 state budget bill.

The final votes came in Friday morning.

The budget totals over $29 billion in first year.

A little over $30 billion the next.

Medicaid expansion would be triggered with the bill becomes law.

The budget bill amidst policy decisions that would legalize casinos on non-tribal lands.

It's also over 600 pages long, Representative Saine.

Governor Cooper says he's gonna let the budget you helped write become law but he's not going to put his signature to it.

So the veto threat seems to be gone.

You got it, got almost everything.

- We did, and we had a great bipartisan vote, right?

Democrats joined us in the house.

We had a lot of spending across the state, reinvestments in communities all across the state.

I think that matters a lot to members when they see that in a budget bill.

A lot of policy too as no different from any other budget that's been passed.

But we finally got it together and got it out.

- Representative Crawford.

- I don't hear a question there, so I'll just respond.

- Analyze Jason Saine's partially written, well, he wrote part of this budget.

You've got the appropriations chair there.

What do you think, what did the Democrat kind of caucus link for the most part?

- Yeah, absolutely.

Well, first of all, I would say I'm not sure I would call it a great bipartisan vote.

You got a few Democrats which I think were the usual suspects we can all agree.

But so I wouldn't call it a great bipartisan vote.

The Democrats, you know, I'm really proud of our caucus.

We stood strong at the beginning of the week.

We got casinos off the table.

We saved Medicaid expansion.

So I'm really proud of what we were able to do at the top of the week when we believed maybe on Sunday and Monday this may be all falling apart.

But overall, the budget really does fail North Carolinians.

We're not making the right kinds of investments that we need for long term.

And I'm quite frankly disappointed in a lot of the budget.

- Jason, I'll give you a counterpoint on that.

It's one of the few big bills where a Democrat and a Republican should go head to head in a public session.

Here we are.

Five, you said five Democrats?

- Five Democrats, yeah.

- That makes it bipartisan.

- Sure, why not?

Look, let's go to history, right?

So, you know, from 2000, 2009, Democrats controlled the legislature.

Teacher salaries increased an average of 3.4%.

Come to us, teacher salaries increased by 7.4%.

There's a big difference.

And we put it together and we're investing in a state that's doing very well.

When you look at where we've been in the last 12 years, while we've been in charge of the budget, whether it's on tax policy, whether it's on the spend, we're not breaking the bank.

Companies are coming to our state.

We're doing a lot of things right.

You know, I'm not surprised that the Democratic party didn't like the Republican budget.

Shocker.

Didn't expect it.

I'm sure it took a long time in your caucus to analyze the budget to decide that they weren't going to be for it.

It's as expected.

But look, it's part of the process, right?

And Democrats are gonna benefit from a lot of what's in this budget anyway and our state is gonna benefit from that.

- Representative Crawford, what do you make of Republicans?

I've seen this on Twitter X now where it's now conservative to expand Medicaid but Democrats wanted Medicaid expansion 10 years ago, over 10 years ago.

- Yeah, well, I think, you know, we really have seen a shift in the Republican party on Medicaid expansion and I'm grateful for that.

It's gonna help 600,000 people across the state of North Carolina.

I think part of it is pressure.

There's been a decade long approach to try to get this done.

And the other piece is there was a lot of federal money tied to Medicaid expansion as an incentive.

And part of the reason you mentioned Governor Cooper allowing, stating that he's gonna allow this budget to become law without his signature.

A lot of that has to do with Medicaid expansion and making sure that we can really take full advantage of the timelines that we've been set up on, - Pat Ryan, earlier this week, we saw Senator Phil Berger, a powerful man in this state, sort of give back the casino legislation.

Would it have been very risky to veto this budget and ask him to, I guess, fold twice in one week?

- So on that point, I want to get back to something Representative Crawford said earlier which is they succeeded in getting casinos out of the budget.

I couldn't really understand why pairing Medicaid expansion with a casino expansion or authorization wasn't a great thing for Democrats.

You could vote against the budget.

The governor could then veto the budget and all you had to do was vote for casinos.

And the governor held a a big bill signing ceremony for online sports betting.

His own budget included VLT.

So I was very surprised to see the governor be so vociferous in his opposition to something that I thought should have been an easier vote and easier win in my opinion.

- But back to the point, it would, the budget politically, how would you advise it?

I know you're a Republican, but is it risky to ask powerful people in this state to give twice in such a short news cycle?

And when does it become a policy decision in business of the state versus you've just offended someone personally who's controlling a huge swath of our legislation?

- Yeah, I don't, I mean- - [Kelly] Maybe it's not like that, but- - Well, I mean, casinos were certainly a controversial part of the budget.

You saw that in the house, in the Senate, right?

It just got to the point, I think, where there's just too much pressure to move forward, you know.

And I think the speaker said this and Representative Saine said it as well, you know, can't agree on something, so we can all just sort of move forward on what we do agree on, and, you know, the governor has said that he's gonna allow the budget to become law without his signature.

So it's just an end product that I think everybody can sort of move forward on.

- They said you didn't show up for work one day in protest of casino.

- Well, and it turns out that we had 30 people in our caucus that had said that they weren't gonna move forward on the budget if casinos were in or out or whatever.

30 people in a 72-member caucus doesn't represent a majority.

And the majority of our caucus were in support of casinos.

So it turns out if, if myself and the others don't show up, they can't proceed forward with business either.

And it was a striking lesson, I think for some.

We had many things to do.

We were still working on budget, we were still working off-site, but they just couldn't move forward on the floor that day.

It's a massive funny thing in politics.

- Mr. Edmisten well, leaving the the last word on some of this to you, let's you soak in the modern comments.

This is not your first rodeo.

[Rufus laughs] - I've been bucked off many times in these rodeos.

- What do you make of what, what do you make of what went down this week?

- Well, it's just nothing surprising to me.

I've seen budgets...

I told my wife a couple days ago, I said, "I remember when the state budget "was $15 billion."

And everybody said, "Oh, my God.

"We're gonna break everybody up."

This is a budget that has a little bit in it for everybody, a little bit what I would call going on the edges.

Some of the things Pat will talk about policy-wise.

I'm a little bit leery of giving money to church related institutions.

I think the separation of powers, are getting a little bit out of balance, because I'm an old Sam Irvine guy, from Lincolnton, North Carolina, very close to where Representative Sain lives, and he was really worried about separation of powers.

And in the North Carolina constitution, it says "The power shall remain separate and apart."

It's one of the few constitutions in America that says that.

And I think we've dipped over in that just a little bit.

But, my friend Sarah, I don't think it's a budget that you can say is all bad, because I saw in there where you're establishing a new school for the treatment of juvenile mental illness.

Now that is something that absolutely, as former Attorney General, I can tell you what happens if you don't treat.

And look what's happening today.

Look at that case in New York, where they found fentanyl in a daycare center.

Who's ever you heard of something like that?

So I applaud that.

And you're helping the birds out at the State Zoo, representatives are saying.

You're building a new aviary.

So, as an old hand who's been around different budgets, it's not a bad budget.

It's it's not mediocre.

It's the budget they did, and the one you're gonna live with, because who's got the goal, wins?

- It's the budget they did.

- Yeah.

- He didn't run those, he didn't run those comments through the House caucus apparently, or the Senate Democratic caucus, but- - No.

- Well, what are some things in the budget you thought, "Okay, we can swallow republicanism, "or did the GOP's lean?

"But we got a few things that we wanted."

To his point, about the hospital.

- Yeah, and you know, I don't mind saying, there is a lot in this budget to like.

There you go.

- There what?

[laughing] That's the end of that.

No, I'm kidding.

There is a lot in this budget to like.

I, you know, I do a lot of work on health and human services.

I'm on the healthcare committee.

I do that in my day job.

And so I really didn't dive into the healthcare part of this budget.

I would have liked a little bit longer time to review the budget details, but that's okay.

That's how things work.

But to your point, on the behavioral health and mental health investments, they are historic investments.

One of the things that I've been following really closely, is the increases for certain workers under Medicaid.

There's $60 million I think in there, for DSP, Direct Service Professionals, under Innovations waiver for people with developmental disabilities.

That's huge for these workers who are taking care of those with the greatest need and the least access.

So, there is a lot to like in here.

I think, you know, our problems with the budget, are related to, you know, we'll talk about this, I think in the next part of this.

But teacher increases, state employee increases, don't even cover half of the cost of inflation over this past year.

You know, it's 7% over two years.

It's actually a little bit less for teachers, around 6.3, but I think the talking point is 7%.

And that's over two years.

Inflation last year alone was 8.7%.

So, we're not even helping people keep up.

Those are our problems with the budget.

There are also a lot of policy changes in here.

Some things related to the courts.

I think you'll get into some of those policies a little bit.

But there's a lot in there that we don't like about the budget, and a lot of places that it does fail North Carolinians, and some of our young people through early childhood investments as well.

- You should host this show, because this was, segment two was to be led off by you talking about spending in pay raise as a matter of fact.

- So we'll just stay right here.

Representative, say, what do you make about the inflation play?

You're bragging about a 7% pay raise.

Last year inflation was 9.1%.

I'm a state employee.

I work for the UNC system.

- Right.

EBS North Carolina is funded through the state budget.

I have to disclaim that for our viewers.

So admittedly, I watched pay raises.

I can't lie about that.

However, you didn't keep up with inflation.

- No, we probably didn't, [clears throat] as you say.

And as we look at any budget, you know, some things you win on, some things you lose on.

House proposal was much different.

We wanted more for state employees.

Unfortunately, we, you know, the senate does have a say in it as well.

And so you end up with a good mix I think, of those opinions.

Yeah, there are other things in a budget, in any budget that, you know, we've not passed a budget yet that I said was a hundred percent perfect, and would get a hundred percent from me.

Nor did the Democrats when they were in charge.

But it, but it does show a good effort, and they did meet us a good part of the way, in getting those salaries up.

You know, there's national pressures as well, on the economy.

You know, national elections do have consequences unfortunately.

So we've seen that inflation that's crept into our state.

But it doesn't mean that that's the end point either.

You know.

There'll be future budgets, there'll be other opportunities.

Hopefully we can, you know, increase that.

One thing in particular too, looking at our highway patrol, our state highway patrol, just trying to remain competitive with our local law enforcement.

'Cause they're raising those wages.

So, seeing 11% bump in those that are in the lower tiers of the highway patrol in the ranks, I should say, lower rankings, getting their salaries up to be competitive with some of our municipalities, our counties.

That's important for us too.

Our LEO's I think, are some of the most crucial people in our state government.

As are Allstate employees.

I, again, I'm a huge fan of our workforce.

I think we need to be competitive.

I think we need to remain competitive.

We need to right-size government always too, but at the same time, make sure we pay our people.

So, you know, the house prevailed somewhat.

Senate had a different opinion on it.

That's the way a budget works.

We've got 170 people that are part of this decision making process.

And you know, sometimes you win on some of these things, and sometimes you lose.

- How effective is the strategy of secretaries like Droxler and Elaine Marshall, going out and saying, "We don't have enough salary capacity to actually fill the office jobs we have.

In fact, we just give up on hiring people, pretty much, 'cause nobody wants one of our jobs."

When they go public like that, does it affect you and and spur discussion, or is it better they walk over and see one of you leaders about it?

- I think it's a little both, really.

We've had these conversations.

I think for some it's harder for them to hear that.

We've certainly been receptive.

Again, on the outside, we understand it.

I understand it from a workforce standpoint.

I don't think it's harmful.

I think it needs to be in the public discussion.

I think it's fine, I think it should be talking about it.

- Pat, a pay raise, COLA, a 4% increase one time for state pensioners, or retirees as they call us, call them these days.

Your thoughts on the scale and the idea of working with what could be a 10% versus a 4%, you meet in the middle on a pay increase of 7% that gets close to inflation.

- Yeah, it's always a balancing act.

And historically the Senate has always come in lower than the H and they usually meet in the middle.

This is no different.

The cost of raises like that, of course, you pay for that with taxes and other things that affect the cost of living generally in North Carolina.

And so I think that both the Senate and the House, over the years, have tried to find the right balance in maintaining the low cost of living that brings families and businesses from out of state that helps grow the entire economy, with what the right figure is for state employees.

Remember, North Carolina was the first state in the entire country to give state employees a $15 minimum wage.

So it's not like they haven't taken action previously.

They also taken some, this is important, over the years, some really targeted investments in some of the highest need parts of the state workforce.

For example, major bonuses to recruiting correctional officers in high vacancy prisons, incentivizing some of the top principals in the state to relocate to some of the struggling schools with I think what was a $30,000 bonus, or something to that effect.

And of course, in the last budget, and they funded it this year as well, providing some of the rural counties with a really large chunk of change to be able to compete with the wealthier counties in teacher supplement salaries.

And so all those things, I think, are part of the story as well, beyond just that top line.

- Well, thank goodness you help pay more for school bus drivers.

Say, well, just a school bus driver.

Well look, you see how it paralyzed certain districts when they didn't have the school bus drivers show up.

They had to dismiss school.

And there was another thing in there too, I saw representatives saying, having been an old teacher myself, and having five members of my family from Appalachian State Teachers College then become teachers and later quit because they couldn't make a living doing it.

There was a provision in there that you give, for those teachers who get in a certain program, I've forgotten what you called it, and they excel and they get paid for that.

I like that because all my teacher friends tell me, "Look, if I go do something extra, I would like to be recognized for it, that I'm trying to better myself, rather than just doing it for my own good."

So I wanna say that there was some in there, Sarah, that did favor the people that teach our children.

And I think that is always what people look for in a budget.

Are you going to look out for law enforcement, like you said?

Are you gonna look out for the teachers of our children?

And are you going to look out for the mental health of people?

And there's some in there that may not be enough, but they made a good try at it.

- He set you up, representative.

[laughing] - He did.

Well, I will say one thing that the House did attempt to do, in their version of the budget, was to reinstate master's pay.

That did not come out in the final version, and that is disappointing, as there's not a reinstatement of master's pay.

And to your point, there ought to be.

If you do something extra, you ought to be compensated for that.

I think we all feel that way in our own professions.

The other thing that I'll just say, two more points about the education funding, one, and state employee for the pay raises, yes, it's 7%, but I don't think we can even close make the claim that we come close to meeting inflation.

That's over two years, 4% in year one, 3% in year two, so we're not coming close to inflation with a 7% raise over two years.

So that's one point I wanna make.

And then the other piece is we put, I think it was half a billion dollars into the private school vouchers that we could be putting into public school employees, public school funding, and other ways.

And so that is something that we have issue with.

The other thing with the school vouchers is that it eliminates income requirements.

So now, regardless of your income, you can get public money to send your child to private school without any accountability.

- You can have a high income and still be stuck with a bad school.

This is really about the children, it's not about the parents' income, giving those kids an opportunity to get the best education they can, putting pressure on the public school systems.

And I come from a system in Lincoln County where we've got a great public school system, and we do more with far less money.

And that's historic fact.

We are the least-funded school system in the state, and we do better than most.

It's not all about the money, it's about the opportunity for the child.

It's about the opportunity for each child to have a future.

And I think that's lost in this.

People wanna talk about what private schools, what public schools are gonna get.

It's really still about the child, and it's about the parents who wanna make the best decision for their child, and making sure they're not trapped in a system where they can't do that.

- Pat, any comments on the school voucher issue, or I would say putting funding behind the student, not giving it to a district.

- It's just a basic philosophical difference.

I think that the philosophy behind school vouchers and school choice in general is pretty simple.

It's that it's better for parents to have more options in where their children goes to school than fewer options.

That philosophy, that shift in how we think about this, is what underlies saying, okay, well there's public dollars that go towards education, instead of giving them to one system, let's let parents decide where their kids want to go to school, whether it's a charter school, or a private school, or the traditional zoned public school.

Because more options in deciding which environment is best is better than fewer options.

That's sort of how I think about it anyway.

- Rufus, I know you don't like public money going to what you perceive to be religious schools, but the whole concept of a voucher going to, say, a secular private school that's just sheer competition against your local school district.

Your thoughts on that?

- Well, as I said I'm a Senator Ervin disciple who believes strictly in separation of church and state.

It was surprise to people, some of the schools that are receiving this kind of money.

And I think I speak for a lot of people.

- That we representatives saying we worry about the accountability of some of these schools.

Who's measuring what they do?

Who's measuring what they teach?

And it just doesn't seem to be there.

Now, I will say that I like the fact of the backpack.

I think that's what you're talking about.

The child takes it with them.

That makes a lot of sense.

But at the same time, if you could assure people that the public schools are not being diminished by this, well, it was lavish this time.

I think it would make people feel a lot better about funding for the private schools.

And I think there's a difference in some of the private schools and strictly religious schools.

They really bother me, 'cause what kind of indoctrination are people getting with taxpayer money?

That bothers me.

- Where do you see the future of traditional public education once parents of all income levels can shop around the different campuses?

- I think a rising tide raises all boats, right?

When we talk about accountability, I don't remember which school system we shut down recently, 'cause we haven't, that's performing low.

We don't do that.

So, accountability works two ways, right?

I think this puts that pressure of accountability on all systems to say, hey, if you don't have the best product out there and parents can choose where they send their child, I think that pressure helps everyone, because then when everyone's competing to have the best education system possible, then everybody wins.

- Now, I would, lemme just add one thing to that.

I think it was the Mount Airy schools superintendent was speaking to her local paper a couple of months ago now.

And she basically, ripped into the local charter schools and private schools and said, "We're doing better than you are.

Our kids are doing better than you are.

We have this innovative program and that innovative program.

We're better than you."

That's fantastic.

Like, if the local public school is better and they're looking at it that way as something of a competition to improve the outcome for students, that's perfect.

You know, and in fact, some kids maybe should go back to that public school system, if they have left, because it's a better product.

That's, I think, the end goal.

- But if we keep taking money out of our public school system, then they're not gonna be able to compete, right?

We can't say that it's okay for our public school systems to make do, right?

I hear you came from a great system.

They're make doing with what they've got, that's great.

But we should not be forcing our public schools when it's our responsibility, constitutional responsibility, to provide that sound public education for every child in the state.

We should not be forcing our schools just to make due, because we wanna... - Oddly enough, my child goes to a charter school who gets far less than our local public school.

And I think the people in Lincoln County, in my district, both benefit.

We are very proud of the school that my son goes to.

Scores are great.

Our local system, scores are great.

Again, you can do both.

And I think, again, I go back to a rising tide can raise all boats.

- Rufus, if a private school takes a public voucher, do you in your legal opinion think that private school then must fall under the constitutional mandate to provide a sound public education for the child for which they're accepting public dollars?

- Well, of course, they should.

but I can't figure out, I'm not wise enough to figure out a way to measure what goes to a private school and especially, a religious school.

That's what I keep harping on, the purely religious schools.

And I'm gonna be sort of a radical here.

I've studied this Leandro case all my life and I'm gonna differ from a lot of people.

I don't know how a Supreme Court decides the educational policy.

And I know that goes against all my liberal democratic friends.

People keep talking about Leandro.

That's the most nebulous kind of thinking I've ever heard of about picking a number out of the air to say that you comply with the Constitution if you give so much money.

And when did the Supreme Court tell the legislature to appropriate money?

Now, it's the same thing.

I think a bad policy where I saw representatives saying that this budget is letting the legislature appoint 10 judges for God's sakes.

That should be an executive function.

When I was Attorney General, there was something called the Advisory Budget Commission.

Remember that kind of animal?

- Right.

- Well, I knew there was something wrong with that, because legislators were putting themselves on it and it was a purely, purely executive function.

And I gave a ruling that, that was unconstitutional.

And boy, did I get beaten up.

I got beaten up by Representative Billy Watkins.

And he said, "I'll get you someday for that."

And he finally did.

He didn't give me a good salary one time.

Gave everybody else a salary and didn't get me.

He didn't reduce my salary.

He gave everybody else a salary except me, and that was wrong.

But I worry about getting all the powers in the... Now, let's face it, when our Constitution was drawn and North Carolina was founded, there was a deliberate attempt to give the legislature more power.

You can go back and search all the history you want.

- We're outta time.

- My gosh.

- We'll have to find you in person and do this over coffee, or a beer, or a bourbon, or a cigar, or something.

- Okay.

- Thank you folks for being on.

What a short show for a long bill.

Appreciate you so much.

Thank you for watching.

Email your thoughts and opinions to statelines@pbsnc.org.

You email us, we will read every email and share a few.

I'm Kelly McCullen.

Thanks for watching.

I'll see you next time.

[upbeat music] - [Narrator] Quality public television is made possible through the financial contributions of viewers like you who invite you to join them in supporting PBS NC.