DMV improving and NC's constitutional amendments up for a vote | Hour 3

What's going on? Thank you so much for listening to this podcast. It is heard live every day from noon to three on WBT radio in Charlotte. And if you want exclusive content like invitations to events, the weekly live stream, my daily show prep with all the links, become a patron, go to the Pete calendar show.com. Make sure you hit the subscribe button, get every episode for free, right to your smartphone or tablet. And again, thank you so much for your support. It is Monday two o'clock and we always chat with AP Dylan unless she's, you know, got, Anything literally better to do with their time. Hello, AP. How are you? I'm great, Pete. How are you doing today? I'm doing okay. So I have to admit, I was not aware that Mini Cooper, a.k.a. Governor Josh Stein, came to town, came to Charlotte to celebrate a Republican initiative. But he did, apparently, about DMV. Yeah. He said that long lines with DMV are shrinking. Yes. And he said in a press release that the statewide average is now 23 minutes as of August, which he said it was an 86 percent drop from a year earlier. So yeah, I'd say 23 minutes is quite an improvement over three and a half to four hours. Yes, absolutely. Yeah. Cause we've talked about this before. Uh, and I mean, it got really bad. I want to say it was last summer. I think when things got really, really bad, I think there were a lot of, um, like there were a lot of student drivers and stuff trying to get their licenses. And like, I had to renew my license. My wife had to do hers. And it was like trying to get an appointment through their, booking system it was just terrible and people had all sorts of they were coming up with all sorts of uh hacks if you will or like ways to to try to you know find an appointment uh otherwise yeah. You're waiting in a line at a dmv for three hours the. Appointment process especially for team drivers i i can't speak to whether or not that's been fixed or not uh our experience several years back with my oldest, was we ended up having to go two counties over just to get his permit issued. And I'm going to find out for myself how well our local office is speeding things along. I need to go over there and update my driver's license and turn it into a real ID one. So I'll probably let you know how that works out. Well, yeah, when I did mine, I had to go to Hickory. I had to drive all the way up towards, not all the way into Hickory, but like one county over or something. Yeah, I don't think that the appointment setting thing has really gotten hiccups out quite yet. But the in-person stuff, yeah, I think it's gotten shorter. So you write about this ribbon cutting. Do we know if he had a big pair of the oversized, ridiculous scissors? Did you happen to catch a visual of the scissors? No, I didn't see those. The only ribbon cutting scissors I've ever witnessed in person was our former governor, Roy Cooper, at the Science Museum in Raleigh using a giant pair of T-Rex scissors to cut a ribbon on a dinosaur exhibit there. Oh, my gosh. Wait, wait. Was it like safety scissors? Like the kinds they give the kindergartners with the big plastic cases. They were really big scissors. It took two hands, both hands, to operate. Oh, yeah, yeah. I mean, some of them get comically large. Yeah. So this relocated office moved to Albemarle Road here in Charlotte, and they closed the Executive Circle site. This is one of four major facility upgrades that was funded by House Bill 125. Which Stein did sign last year. And you got five more offices slated to open or relocate in 2027. Fuquay-Varina, Cabarrus County, Wake Forest, Tabor City, and Camp Lejeune as well. And this, yeah, and to his credit, Josh Stein, right, he did make note that this came from legislation, from those dastardly Republicans who that we're trying to improve DMV efficiencies. Yep. So give them credit for that. All right, let's shift over to the upcoming ballot. We have a couple of initiatives on the ballot for North Carolina voters this year. Three amendments to our state constitution. One of them is about the income tax. This is already a constitutional provision that we have a cap on the state income tax. Right now it is 7%. A couple of years ago, we took it down from 10% down to 7%. And so now this constitutional amendment is going to take it down, is going to cut that 7% figure in half, right? And codify that. 3.5. Yep. All right. So why do Republicans say that this is necessary? And then what did the Democrats say this is about? Well, Republicans, you know, they're building on their, their tax cut schedule that they've done over the last decade, which has brought tax cuts down. It's increased the amount that, uh, parents can do for the child tax credit. It's done a bunch of things. Um, and it's set to, it's set to go down by 2.99 by 2020, 2032. Sorry. That's the personal tax rate. Um, you know, previous triggers to the lower rates were removed in the most recent budget. Um, but depending on state revenue performance, you know, the additional quarter reduction could, could happen, um, by then. So, that's just. Building on their, their tax policy, which was something that was sort of spearheaded by Senate leader Berger. He, he came in there or Republicans when they came in, they decided to start doing tax reform and it's, it's led to us being, you know, considered one of the best states for taxes, both personal and business. So, I mean, we've seen a lot of companies come into North Carolina because of those, those tax rates, which is good. It's, And they're putting it to the citizens. So they're like, do you want to see this come down? Now, Democrats say that it's going to hamstring them as to how much revenue they can raise in future budgets and that sort of thing. But it's neither here nor there. I mean, they could add more to different taxes and that sort of thing in the future if they wanted to. But every year, there's been. All this speculation that we're going to, you know, have a deficit and that, you know, the state isn't going to be able to pay for what it needs to pay for. But meanwhile, the rainy day reserve funds are in the billions of dollars and we've always made a budget, you know, that hasn't, that hasn't relied on, you know, new, new tax and new income. So, uh, and none of those budget deficits actually happened. We actually had, you know, surpluses. Right. So, They're pointing at that and the fact that, you know, more business keeps coming into the state. More people keep coming into the state. Our population has risen. So, you know, that's more of a base. To draw from. Right. And so this was, as you mentioned, when the Republicans won control of the legislature back in 2010, they take over in 2011. I remember Senator Bob Rucho, like he wanted to get this down to zero. He wanted no income tax at all. And so they put. That wasn't going to happen. Right. Yeah. And so they. they put in place in law a schedule basically of like, here's a quarter point drop based on this, as you called it, the triggers, which was if we're getting enough revenue, this amount of revenue, then this will drop again. And so like they were, they were gradually moving us over the last 15 years away from these high personal income taxes and corporate income taxes. And so now, we're set to go to 3.49% personal income tax. And so this would put that cap in place. And I find this argument from the Democrats like, well, what if we need to raise taxes because of like, you know, a natural disaster or an economic recession or something, we're going to need to raise revenue through increased in taxes. And I'm like, Well, that's the worst time to raise taxes. Like, why would you do that if you got people that are going through a recession? And your answer is, well, let's just raise taxes on them. And that's really what this is about. I think Republicans are worried in the future if Democrats retake control, they're just going to undo these laws. Right. That's the that's the fear. Well, yeah, I mean, we have one of the highest, if not the highest tax rate for business in the southeast. prior to 2010. You know, our tax rate for personal was, you know, up over seven. It was like 10% at one point. You know, these things were not business or in-migration friendly things. And now we have a surge of people coming into the state, which, of course, widens the tax base and increases the amount of money. You know, if we wanted to go backwards, you know, fine, sure, raise the taxes. You'll see people looking, you know, for the exits eventually. Just look what happens in New York. Yeah, exactly. Yeah, they're all here. And I say that as a... But look, I was way ahead of the curve on this, okay? I came down here in 19... I've been here for like 30 years, but I grew. Up in New York. We count now. All right. Reining in the property tax is another one. This is also called a levy limit. This question is about property taxes and the... The increases that local governments would be unable to surpass, like they're basically going to put some sort of a cap on the rate of increase that the locals could charge. Why are they looking to do this? Well, some some counties and some municipalities have outpaced inflation with the levies that they've put into place you know wake county is one of them um so you know it's basically you know people are realizing that the house they bought for x amount of dollars you know back in the day is has tripled in tax levies over you know the last you know just five six years And we've got folks that, you know, have lived in their home their whole life and, you know, are in limited incomes, and now they're having to pay triple the amount on their house and property taxes. They can't afford that. There was a couple examples in some of the committee meetings of an elderly lady who was forced out of her home because she had lived there for 60 years, and then it was in Guilford County, I believe. They increased the property tax levy on it so much that she couldn't afford it on her fixed income. So she was forced to sell it and move out. you know, that's the kind of problem that we got. And, you know, a lot of the problem comes from these municipalities and local commissions who are, you know, not living within their means, frankly. Yeah. Some, some things go, you know, some things are expensive and continue to become expensive. You know, the basics like fire and police and, you know, sewer and water and all those kinds of things. Yeah. Those, those are, you know, the core things that they should be involved with, but you've got a whole bunch of other projects and things that usually end up getting, you know, packed into a commissioner's budget. And those things aren't necessarily needed. They're unnecessary. But they're wish list items. And so they're like, oh, where are we going to find the money? Oh, I know. We raised the property levy again. Right. Yeah, this to me is state lawmakers that are basically bringing to heel local electeds because the state lawmakers represent the very same citizens that are being nailed with these taxes, too. Right. So they're like, we're trying to protect our constituents from these increases. And they're telling the locals, like, you guys need to prioritize your spending for the needs over the wants. And of course, like, you're already seeing the anti- You know, the opposition campaign against this. And they're like, well, what if we need to raise money for fire and police and schools? And they always make that same argument. Well, those are the core functions. They should be funding. Right. Exactly. More money for those things if they're living within their means. Right. If they're not, you know, overexpending. I mean, just look at some of the towns that have had to be taken over, you know, fiscal control by the local government commission. If you look at a bunch of those, you can see where, you know, they're spending one or I. They weren't focusing on the essentials. Right. Yeah. And it's always the same thing. They always use the core functions. in their sales pitch for the increased taxes. Meanwhile, they're blowing, you know, tens or hundreds of millions of dollars. Like, we were going over the budget. The county budget for public safety is lower than parks and rec. You know, and meanwhile, they'll cite public safety as the reason why we need to raise taxes. Oh, don't you want to fund the jail? Don't you want to fund the sheriff's office? Don't you want to fund the courts? Like, yes, I do. But maybe we should fund that higher than the parks and rec, you know? Yeah, priorities. Right. Priorities. Alright, and real quick, the last one that's on the ballot, voter ID. I thought we have voter ID. We do. This one enshrines it in the Constitution and will hopefully cut off any of these lawsuits that have gone on over it that have all pretty much been discarded or, you know, dropped by the courts. You know, we have an expansive list of the acceptable forms of ID for voting. You know, absentee ballots are going to require voter ID, you know, just like regular ballots this year. So, you know, I mean... It is what it is. Only one House Democrat voted to pass it down party lines in 2024. That was, I believe, Shelley Willingham of Edgecombe. So, you know, it's a partisan issue for sure. Well, for the electeds, not for the voters. Democrat voters are for it. Yeah, I mean, this goes all the way back to 2018. They had those six ballot questions back then, and voter ID was one of them. 55%, over 55% of North Carolina voters passed that question saying, yes, we need voter ID in North Carolina. And, of course, it saw a bunch of legal challenges, and they sued over that. And, you know, I mean, it was interesting to watch them try to overturn the actual will of the majority of voters in the state, and it just didn't fly. So, you know, we do have photo ID now. Yeah. All right. AP Dillon, you can catch her work at the North State Journal and SJ Online. You can also subscribe to her newsletter. It's called More to the Story. over on Substack. We got links in the podcast description. AP, thanks for your time as always. We appreciate it. Absolutely. Thank you, Pete. All right. Take care. That's AP Dillon. The holidays will be here before you know it. And so now is the time to create precious and priceless family heirlooms that will last for generations. Take your old photos, slides, films, and tapes to create a video in Mint Hill. There, they'll turn those memories into the story of your lives, memories from past family events captured forever to pass down to future generations. Creative Video's skilled team will professionally transfer your family's stories onto easy-to-use USB drives or DVDs that won't deteriorate over time like the old photos and tapes are doing right now. They will create a keepsake video that you can share and copy and keep forever. I can see it now. You're gathered around the holiday table with your loved ones, watching all these memories and people of your lives. You're sharing laughs, maybe some tears, telling stories that make your family uniquely yours. Beat the holiday rush and get your memories in now. Go to createavideo.com or visit them in Mint Hill just off I-485. Your photos and videos are your life told through the eyes of everyone around you and all who came before you. And they will tell others to come who you are. Visit createavideo.com. Let me jump over and get James on the program. Hello, James. Welcome to the show. Hey. Well, I was enjoying listening to you nice folks inform us about the constitutional amendments and telling us what they were. And I wanted to thank you for that. Well, certainly. I'm a giver. I got a really good laugh because about a minute and a half after you guys finished your conversation, there's a group of political signs that I was going past, and there's a great big one that said, vote no on constitutional amendments. Yeah, that's the Carolina full word and the Democrat Party and the leftist groups, they're all opposed to all of these amendments. They're also opposed to cutting taxes and voter identification and the like. So I think we usually refer to them as the usual suspects. Correct, sir. Yes, sir, James. There we go. Yeah. But I just wanted to thank you. I hadn't had that good a laugh in a while. Well, you're welcome. Although I got to say that it's the people who made the billboards. They're the ones that gave you the laugh, really. Well, they're the ones that for some reason or another always want to change things and make it worse for us. Yeah, that's on brand. James, I appreciate the call, sir. Thank you. Yeah, the lefties are all against these ballot initiatives. Carolina Full Word, among the top billing for the usual suspects on this front, if you go to their website, they've got a post up there, vote against all three amendments, and they outline their case. And we'll take a look at their argument. All right, real quick. Every government number gets revised, right? Every projection gets walked back. Gold does not file corrections like GovCo. Revelation Gold Group helps families hold physical gold and silver, including in a tax-advantaged gold IRA. It's real, it's in your name, and 10 minutes tells you if your retirement account qualifies. If you want to learn more, go to calendarmetals.com. That's calendarmetals.com. There is a link in the podcast description. Or if you want to talk to somebody, you can call 888-465-3049. All right, so let's take a look at what our lefty pals over at carolinaforward.org, what their reasons are for opposing all three of the constitutional amendments in North Carolina. So again, you've got the cap on the income tax rate. You've got a cap on or a limit, a levy limit on property tax increases. and voter ID. Okay? So they start off. This is a piece by Rebecca Wilden. For a lot of North Carolina families, the household budget isn't just tight right now. It's stretched to the breaking point. Gas costs more. Groceries cost more. Housing and health care. Child care and insurance. Electricity and phone bills. All of them are up. everyone has less at the end of the month than they used to. Well, okay. Not everyone, not everyone. Some people have gotten raises. Some people got other jobs, get more money. Like, so let's not get all hyperbolic here in our catastrophizing, please. Okay. So, um, the income tax, this would, as we mentioned with AP Dylan right now in the constitution, and we have had this for decades, um, We have had a cap on the income tax rate. It was originally, and I believe this was the constitution adopted after the Civil War, it was set at 7%. It was then increased by Democrats to 10%, okay? And then a few years ago, it was brought back down through a constitutional amendment that we all voted on and approved to take it from 10% to 7%. Now, we're being asked, do you want to cap it at 3.5%? Because that is, coincidentally, that is where it's going to be next year when the scheduled reduction is kicks in and goes down to 3.49. So that will basically take us to 3.49. Now in 2028, it's scheduled to drop another half point down to 2.99%, but this would simply set the cap. Now, what is their argument? Their argument is that we want to tax the rich more. And so because they make more money, That means they pay more in taxes, right? Because, you know, 3% or 7%, whatever it is, 3% is more actual dollars on a million dollars, right? It's like, it's going to be in the 33,000 range, I believe. I was told there'd be no math, but... You're going to be spending a lot more in taxes. If you make a million dollars, 3% of a million generates more actual dollars, real dollars to the treasury. Then if I only make $ 10, 000 a. Year, right? So what their argument is that the poor people are not going to enjoy as big of a tax cut or benefit from this in real dollars. Well, of course not. Because that's how percentages work, right? That's just math. If you're making more money, you're paying more taxes, and so if the tax is cut, you would be the larger beneficiary of that tax cut because it's a percentage of what you're making, which is more than what the other person's making. And then, of course, they say, When the state faces serious natural disasters, a big economic crash, or just a widespread demand for more affordable health care and better public education, basically any reason whatsoever, one thing our legislators could do is tax the highest earners at. A slightly higher rate than folks struggling to make ends meet. Of course, they ignore the standard deduction component in all of this. Of course they do, right? What are they advocating? They're advocating for a progressive tax code with marginal rates, right? They're saying we want, like, if you make under $ 50, 000, you have a rate of 0%. If you make from 50 to 150,000, then you have a 1% rate or something. And then if you make more than 150,000, then you're at like a 75% rate, something like that. They want to charge different income rates based on the amount of money, like the federal government does a progressive marginal tax rate, right? That's what they want to do. Now they're not running on this campaign. Democrats aren't running on this. Of course not. I mean, it's not a very wise thing to do to run a, political election campaign on a platform of, I'm going to raise your. Taxes, right? But here's the thing. Democrats did this. Like, North Carolina is a perfect test case for this stupid theory that Democrats have, okay? They ran this kind of tax system for the better part of a century and a half. And where they left the state in 2010 before they got tossed out of office, where they ran the state was into structural budget deficits. We were constantly underfunded. We did not have enough money coming in. Businesses did not want to relocate here, right? It was very difficult. Business climate, income tax climate, that sort of thing. And so it had a negative deleterious impact on the state. Republicans get in and they start doing all of their tax reforms. They basically adopt a flat rate, which is what we have now. They've gone to, they did a flat rate. Everybody pays the same percentage. And then we want to start bringing that percentage down by a half a point, a quarter point, half a point. Whatever, every year. And what has been the result? Well, Democrats predicted these very same people that are telling us vote. No, they said, that the Republican plan would bankrupt our state. Like they were talking cats and dogs living together, like real end of the world kind of stuff here. They said we were going to go bankrupt. We'd have deficits. And what has actually occurred is that we've become like one of the top three States for businesses to move to and to do business in. We are, one of the fastest-growing states. We're in the top three in migration from other states. People are fleeing to North Carolina. Now, we can argue if that's good or bad, but people are coming here because of these things, right? And we've been running budget surpluses every year. So they've been wrong. So why would you trust them on their prognostications about this kind of impact? And note what they really are saying here when they say that when the state faces natural disasters, an economic crash, or just a widespread demand for all of the things Democrats are demanding, right? What they're saying is we want to be able to jack up your income taxes above the 3.5%. We want to do not just the marginal rates. We want to raise everyone's taxes. That's where they want to go. They want to go back to, I should say. And also, just the sheer dumbassery of raising taxes during an economic crash. Why would you do that? That is literally the stupidest thing that you could do. Why does it need to be a constitutional amendment? Because Republicans... fear that if they lose control of the legislature at some point in the future, that Democrats will begin unwinding all of these reforms that Republicans put in place. And the way to protect these things is to put them in the Constitution, which makes it far more difficult to just repeal, to do away with. That's the point. Next up, you've got the... levy limit on property taxes. The property tax amendment would require the General Assembly to come up with some system to limit how much local governments can increase the total amount of property tax revenue they collect. Yes, because some local jurisdictions are raising property taxes. In ridiculous fashion. And they're forcing people to have to move out of their homes that they own. Because the property tax bill has gotten too high. And as I said earlier, like the cities and counties, right? These are creatures of the state's creation. And so the state is telling these local jurisdictions, these local bodies, you guys need to prioritize your core functions of government. You have gone out of control. That's what's prompted this. Let me jump over to the text line. Greg says, I live in Kershaw. Our property tax for a house and 25 acres is right over $ 400, listed as agricultural. Well, yes. Yes, if you have– there are breaks that you can get if you've got that kind of property. You don't– you're not going to be paying what residential pays. And commercial, too, for that matter. Daryl says, eliminate property tax and income tax and have a higher embedded sales tax. Taxes the underground economy plus areas that depend on tourism will benefit. Yeah. I've given this example many, many times. I gave this example last night during the Talktoberfest live stream when we were talking about this very topic. It's a balloon. Think of the government budget, the government spending as a balloon. And you can squeeze different parts of. The balloon, right? And you squeeze on this side and that's the sales tax. You squeeze on the other side and that's the property tax. You squeeze in the middle and that's the income tax, right? So you have basically that's it, right? You've got, you've got sales taxes, you've got income taxes and you've got property taxes. Okay. And so governments squeeze this balloon in different places and, but the amount of air inside the balloon doesn't change. It just shifts to one other part of the balloon, right? The only way to reduce the tax burden is to let some of the air out of the balloon. That's the way you do that. So from the Carolina forward folks, They say that the biggest winners of any property tax increase limit will be Duke Energy. And other big corporations. The North Carolina Housing Coalition identified an average savings of just $ 84. For North Carolina homeowners. I admit I have not gone to research their math on this and how they did this analysis because, again, this is. A limit to the growth. the increase. This isn't saying that you can't increase your property taxes. It's saying that you are limited in how much you can increase. Okay. So number one, we don't know what this formula, this levy limit formula will look like. However, in states that have adopted this sort of thing, the formula generally looks the same, which is, Population growth, so if your community grew by 1%, plus inflation. And so if inflation grew by 3%, you could do a formula that's population growth plus inflation. So if inflation is 3%, your population growth is 1%, you can then raise your tax rate by 4%. That's how that would work. See, so it doesn't cut any of these governments' funds. It doesn't prevent them from raising property taxes. It prevents them from raising them too high too often. That's the idea. Local governments, they say, use property tax revenue to pay for the services people depend on every day. school and community college facilities, police and fire protection, emergency medical services, roads, parks, libraries, infrastructure, and other community services. Correct. Yes, that is how local governments in North Carolina, cities and counties, this is how they generate their revenue. They don't collect income taxes. They do collect some sales taxes. And if they want to raise their sales tax, then they have to go to the legislature and ask for permission to do so. Because again, we are what's referred to as a mother may I state. We don't have the kinds of local autonomy that other states have, like New York. This is why New York City can do a whole bunch of stuff that the other cities around it do not do. But in North Carolina, all of the seminal power is in the legislative body. And so when cities want to raise their sales tax, they have to get legislative approval to do so. Okay? So yes, we all agree this is how local governments fund their operations. However, what Carolina Forward does not mention, prioritization. See, they would have you believe that everything should be funded. And everything should be funded at the highest levels. Like, no, no. You should be funding your core services, primarily your core services. And a lot of cities and counties over the years, they start doing a lot of extras. They start doing all these extra things that then raise the spending levels. And then they take out debt or something. They issue bonds. And therein lies the problem, is that, right, you guys, you're spending on stuff that is not fiscally prudent. That's the idea here. So if we approve this on the ballot, this will then become a constitutional amendment. The legislature would develop the formula, and that would then be applied to the local jurisdictions. And then, of course, voter ID, which people should pass this for obvious reasons. All right, that'll do it for this episode. Thank you so much for listening. I could not do the show without your support and the support of the businesses that advertise on the podcast. So if you'd like, please support them, too, and tell. Them you heard it here. You can also become a patron at my Patreon page or go to the Pete Kaliner show dot com. Again, thank you so much for listening and don't break anything while I'm gone.