Lopping the Head off the Statue: The NC GOP’s Assault on Responsible Governance

There is nothing like the hyperbole of war to raise ire of the faithful. Dare to wish someone happy holidays? War on Christmas! Question the wisdom of a $15 minimum wage? War on workers! These pronouncements tend to rally the zealots, the perpetually aggrieved, and the activists in search of a fight while leaving the more rational lot of us rolling our eyes. With that in mind, the notion that the North Carolina Republican Party has declared war on anything (education, democracy, etc.) can’t help but read like exaggerated wolf-crying (to say nothing of selectively partisan bellyaching). And yet, when examining the totality of the state legislature’s sweeping “reforms” – both proposed and enacted – one cannot help but notice some very real flames beneath all the smoke.

Before delving into the pervasive awfulness of the GOP’s legislative program and Gov. Pat McCrory’s abettment thereof, it is important to understand how the Tarheel State got to such a low point. Ask a progressive, and the answer will be that deep-pocketed conservative donor Art Pope bought himself a few elections. But this fairy tale is naïve at best and disingenuous at worst. The fact of the matter is that for as unpopular as state Republicans have made themselves since taking power, North Carolina suffered in various ways under the leadership of the Democratic politicos that preceded them. The decade prior to 2011’s Republican ascendancy saw increased spending and ballooning debt as well as the unethical use of education lottery fund money to plug shortfalls in the general fund. It saw the criminality and corruption of Democratic U.S. Rep. Frank Ballance and Speaker of the N.C. House of Representatives Jim Black. It saw the sketchy campaign financing and state-funded travel abuses of Democratic Govs. Mike Easley and Bev Perdue. These things – and more – happened, and voters noticed. Ergo, Republican victories and Democratic sour grapes.

However, the combination of legislative control with McCrory’s 2012 election victory and some changes to the makeup of the state’s courts led to a consolidation of Republican political power, and GOPers wasted little to no time being corrupted by it. Despite some noble attempts at restoring fiscal sanity, McCrory has become the Chris Christie of the South, a self-serving opportunist who spent lavishly on renovating the executive mansion that he occupied and worked to actively shield his former employer/current financial backer Duke Energy from having to pay for its role in negligently allowing coal ash to spill into the Dan River. Not to be outdone in the self-interest, the legislature passed a racially gerrymandered redistricting plan that was as bold as it was asinine. The attempt to pack as many black voters into a district as possible (and thus dilute their political power) meant that I (in Greensboro) shared congressional representation with the fine folks down in Charlotte, a good ninety (!!) miles away.

Were this the full extent of Republican malfeasance, it would be hard to classify it as anything more than business as usual. After all, Govs. Easley and Purdue had their own ethical lapses, and Democratic legislatures in years’ past were no strangers to gerrymandering. Having the party in power misuse its power is not unique to North Carolina Republicans or to North Carolina, for that matter.

No, what separates recent legislative and executive actions from the typical sorry state of American politics is the aggressively reckless shortsightedness with which Republicans have conducted themselves. In attempting to appease rural conservatives and solidify their hold on offices, they have taken an all-or-nothing approach that not only risks tainting the Republican brand but the state’s reputation as a whole. They’ve done this by following what has sadly become a predictable and familiar strategy:

1. Exaggerate the nature of a problem (or elevate a non-problem to the level of a problem).
2. Formulate that is disproportionate to the problem at hand. Said response may or may not actually address the problem, but it is likely to create or exacerbate other problems in doing so. It will almost certainly include a conservative wishlist item or a component that attacks Democratic politically.
3. Insist that said response is necessary and justified in light of the problem. Downplay the potential for long-term harm and/or frame skepticism as partisan overreaction (which, to be fair, there likely would be plenty of regardless).

We have seen this strategy used to usher in changes to everything from voting rules to higher education governance to discrimination policies. On more than one occasion, these changes were rushed through under dubious circumstances. And in just about all instances, North Carolina loses.

Consider, for instance, North Carolina’s voter ID law. Enacted seemingly to thwart voter fraud, it requires North Carolina voters to prevent proof of identity in order to vote. While impersonating a registered voter at the polls can theoretically happen, testimony from the director of State Board of Elections indicates that it is a very infrequent phenomenon. The law, therefore, constitutes an exaggerated response to a non-problem. Moreover, while requiring voters to prove who they say they are is not an unreasonable request, the rub is in the exact nature of that proof: a driver’s license or passport. For those who do not already have one, obtaining this ID ranges anywhere from mere inconvenience to bureaucratic nightmare. Republicans are right to object to creeping bureaucratization in many aspects of life – healthcare, for instance – and entirely hypocritical for promoting it here. This, of course, does not even address the law’s restriction of early voting. Remind me, how does increasing the likelihood of a traffic jam at the polls protect against voter fraud?

At least the voter ID law had the pretense of addressing a problem. When it came to the University of North Carolina system, the Republican-controlled Board of Trustees offered the vaguest of justifications for forcing out system president Tom Ross and even praised him as they pushed him out the door. Of course, the fact that Ross is a registered Democrat is likely the culprit, but good luck getting (now former) board chair John Fennebresque to admit that. The board then followed this by conducting an overly secretive search process that resulted in the appointment of Margaret Spellings, the former U.S. Secretary of Education. While that credential may sound impressive, it is worth noting that Spellings’ background in higher education is as a paid director of for-profit Phoenix University’s parent company. In all fairness, this is not the first time that a political appointee was named system president under suspect circumstances – paging Erskine Bowles – but the opacity and tactlessness with which this switch was handled easily trumps past politicking.

The latest legislative fiasco and the one that has garnered the most attention as of late is HB2,  North Carolina’s so-called “bathroom bill,” (a misnomer if there ever was one). The bill was rushed through the state legislature in an extremely hurried vote during a one-day session in response to a non-discrimination ordinance passed by the city of Charlotte that prohibits sex or gender discrimination in public accommodations. In other words, transgendered individuals in Charlotte were free to use restrooms that matched their gender regardless of their anatomy. Supposedly enacted in the interest of “safety,” the state law not only undoes Charlotte’s ordinance and prevents local governments from passing similar ordinances in the future; it mandates that anyone in a state facility – be it a school or a government office – use the bathroom that matches the gender on their birth certificate.

This is an all-too-predictable application of the contentious GOP strategy. First, what it purports to address is actually a non-problem. There is not an epidemic of transgendered individuals sneaking into restrooms to commit sexual assault, and existing law already prohibits such assaults regardless. Second, the response is disproportionate. Not only does the law go far beyond the transgender bathroom access issue (more on that later), but it also sets policy for all state facilities. While there is something to be said for preserving the right of businesses to set their own bathroom policies – those that are LGBT-hostile can be boycotted – inasmuch as transgendered individuals are part of the public, denying them the ability to use a bathroom that corresponds to their gender in a building that their tax dollars help finance is grossly insulting. Third, inasmuch as McCrory’s after-the-fact attempts at damage control try to paint the uproar this legislation has caused as a tempest in a teapot, there have been some very real and very ramifications that neither he nor the legislature apparently bothered to consider. Not only does this stupid monstrosity of a law require that male-presenting trans individuals use women’s restrooms in school and government buildings (think about that for a moment, folks), but the resulting uproar has seen governments issue travel bans to North Carolina as well as businesses threatening to boycott the state. That, plus the likelihood of pending legislation, makes for a waste of money that we can ill afford.

As if the bathroom provision was not contentious enough, this law also does the following:

• Sets forth a statewide nondiscrimination policy that deliberately omits sexual orientation while preventing local governments from setting policies that include it.
• Prevents those fired in violation of that very same discrimination policy from bringing suit in state court (they can still file federally and bring a complaint to the state Human Rights Commission).
• Prevents a municipality from setting a minimum wage that is higher than that of the state.

Remember, ladies and gentlemen, that defenders of this law have claimed “safety” as a justification. What any of these other provisions have to do with safety is beyond me, and likely beyond anyone reading this as well.

Furthermore, while there are sound theoretical arguments for abolishing a minimum wage altogether, inasmuch as that is unlikely to happen, a local wage is far preferable than a state wage. Yes, it leaves open the door for Seattle’s unrealistic foolishness, but it also acknowledges the reality that costs of living and costs of doing business (permitting/compliance fees, rents, etc.) can vary immensely within a state. By pretending that $7.25 an hour means the same thing in Jones or Rockingham Counties that it does in Charlotte and Wilmington, economically illiterate Republicans have declared themselves proud residents of economic fantasyland.

Sadly, despite the rashness, brashness, expense, and incompetence displayed thus far, it is hard to imagine GOPers changing course now. The angrier anyone who isn’t a dyed-in-the-wool supporter becomes, the more they must believe they are doing something right. Even McCrory, who is usually in-tune with the attitudes of the business community and has bucked his own party on occasion, seems lost given his HB-2 cheerleading. What is underfoot now is not Republicans taking the turn at the wheel to which their election victories entitled them, nor is it an attempt to govern by conservative principles after years of liberal largesse. No, this is the hijacking of the entire state’s future to serve the needs of a rural, homophobic, anti-intellectual contingent dead set on building and maintaining a permanent majority.

Having lived in this state for more than a decade and endured the governance of both major parties, I put little stock in the idea that Democrats are what is best for North Carolina. But if nothing else, they are not this. If the state is a statue that Democrats did a poor job of maintaining throughout the years, Republicans have “repaired” it by lopping off its head because they never really cared for it anyway.