Here’s where Mecklenburg legislative candidates stand on key issues

Explain why you would or would not support expansion.

I support expansion because people need accessible health care that can't otherwise afford it.

Explain why you would or would not support expansion.

Everyone deserves to have a way to pay for medical treatment.

Explain why you would or would not support expansion.

A substantial body of research has investigated the positive effects of Medicaid expansion on coverage, affordability, access to care, quality of care, and health outcomes. Vulnerable populations including people with substance abuse disorders, those with HIV, early retirees, cancer patients, and others would see larger coverage gains with Medicaid expansion. A study by George Washington University estimates that if Medicaid expansion happened now, 643,000 more people would gain Medicaid coverage by 2022. Medicaid expansion would help those whose income is too high to qualify for Medicaid but who do not have enough money to afford private insurance. We need to provide the citizens of North Carolina with affordable, quality healthcare and the most effective way to do so is by expanding Medicaid. Not only does Medicaid expansion help those in need of affordable quality health care but there is also a great economic argument for expansion. The uninsured, due to severe illness, would ultimately end up qualifying for current Medicaid but costing North Carolina much more without expansion. The same George Washington University study predicts that North Carolina could bring in 37,200 new jobs and would increase its business activity by $11.7 billion in three years. That injection of capital could be used on infrastructure, education, and housing needs across the state.

Explain why you would or would not support expansion.

I support Medicaid expansion because I believe in providing access to high-quality health care to our families. I believe Medicaid expansion would encourage cost-saving initiatives, assist North Carolina in serving high-risk populations, increase healthcare outcomes and in a lot of cases, education outcomes for our students. The federal government would pay for 90% of the expansion and the Hospitals would cover 10% insulating tax-payers from additional costs. I also believe North Carolina should run its own health care exchange. By doing so we can allow out-of-state insurers to compete for slots in our exchange which would force Humana, United Healthcare, Aetna, and Blue Cross Blue Shield to be more competitive in terms of their pricing and benefits.

Explain why you would or would not support expansion.

Medicaid expansion is the kind of public policy that should receive broad bi-partisan support in any political climate. It makes sound economic sense and would have a lasting positive impact on North Carolina citizens. Expanding Medicaid can reduce infant mortality, grow the economy and close coverage gaps for more than 600,000 people in North Carolina. In addition, 90% of Medicaid expansion is paid for by the federal government, and the remaining 10% is paid by hospitals. North Carolina taxpayers, through their federal taxes, have continued to support expansion in 37 other states but none of that has come back to North Carolina. It is time that it did.

I'll help rural areas through state incentives to bring more jobs that pay a competitive wage, build more roads to alleviate traffic congestion, transform vacated structures and lands into affordable housing. Invest into infrastructure projects such as water, electricity and highspeed internet to keep up the growing number of people fleeing the high cost of urban life for a more affordable one.
I'll reduce the split by letting rural residents know that they shouldn't be threatened by growing populations while making sure these areas are well served to lessen their growing pains.

Economic mobility and minimum wage increases.

The quote, “Rural and urban areas are economically, socially, and environmentally interlinked spaces.” (Gebre & Gebremedhin, 2019), succinctly explains the important symbiotic relationship shared between urban and rural areas. There is a political divide between North Carolinas urban and rural areas where many in rural spaces believe major cities look down on their way of life and ignore their grievances. This divide appears to grow wider every year. Polarization and politicians who exploit the polarization for their own gain are a threat to our symbiotic relationship. We need elected officials who are not afraid to visit our rural neighbors, listen to their concerns and work on building bridges. Urban areas rely on rural areas to meet demands for food, water, raw materials for our survival and economic development. However, our rural neighbors are feeling the effects of urbanization. The most educated and talented from rural areas are leaving and moving to urban areas for great economic opportunity and upward mobility, leaving behind a smaller pool of highly qualified workers. By 2050, nearly 7 in 10 people will live in cities. While not inherently negative, it does mean urban areas should prepare for the continued growth of cities while not neglecting rural development, ensuring food and economic security. The first step in North Carolina should be establishing high-speed internet in all 100 counties even if that means making the internet in some areas a public utility. Providing that connectivity will bring us together and potentially open rural areas as new markets for innovative business.

I, along with the governor and my caucus support a statewide school construction bond that would not only support new school construction but help rural counties fund much-needed school repairs. I also believe the divide is widened by a lack of high-speed internet, economic development strategies, and aging infrastructure. I have traveled to counties that lack the infrastructure (trains, airports, well-maintained highways, and state roads) needed to support small and local businesses. I also support initiatives to expand the North Carolina Virtual Public School into our rural counties and support current joint agreements between local school systems and their community colleges which allow students to earn college credit while they attend their traditional high school. We should also acknowledge that the divide is somewhat naturally occurring because our young people are leaving a smaller county for college and are less likely to return home. That means a drop in population and the tax base, as younger folks are leaving and residents are aging, it deals a double blow to our local municipalities. Studying initiatives that would promote "returning home" without also displacing long-time residents could potentially be the next issue to solve.

North Carolina also needs to address how we recruit and retain businesses as well. We know that Fortune 500 companies are less likely to look at certain rural counties, we need to identify the "why's" behind that and then figure out how to address those shortfalls in a fiscally responsible way, working in conjunction with county commissioners, town boards, city councils, and school boards. The state exacerbates the issue when we use taxpayer funds to create winners and losers. Regional economic development groups could also be a part of the solution. North Carolina cannot be the greatest state in the union when 60+ of our counties are struggling.

Much like Charlotte, the rural areas of our state are in dire need of critical investments; however while in Charlotte these investments are needed to manage growth, the rural parts of North Carolina need these investments to survive. It is important for areas like Charlotte to lead the charge on rural investments because while a majority of the wealth is concentrated in the urban areas, the political power still lies in rural North Carolina. Any investments that our city needs from state funds will require rural support and that is a challenge. The rural and urban areas need to come together and that will happen only when urban NC invests in rural NC thereby winning the support of both. Investments in education and universal access to high speed broadband so rural citizens have the skills to succeed in today's economy and the resources to connect to opportunities. The vitality of our rural communities is just as important as our vibrant cities. Whether it's transportation, public health, environmental stewardship or the opioid crisis, I believe policies and politics will bring us together to tackle our toughest problems. If we can focus on these vital goals we will be able to incorporate all parts of our state together.

Explain your answer.

Politicians draw lines that benefit their parties to stay in power.

Explain your answer.

I believe the courts have done a good job keeping things fair.

Explain your answer.

Gerrymandering is a threat to democratic values. It undermines the idea of one-person-one-vote and decreases public confidence in the electoral process. In North Carolina, politicians are influencing outcomes instead of working to appeal to voters. An independent redistricting commission will ensure a fair, non-partisan and impartial process that requires districts to be compact and contiguous making our elections fairer and more representative of the people.

Explain your answer.

I support an Independent Redistricting Commission because legislators shouldn't choose their voters, voters should choose their legislator, that is why I voted no on the final maps. Even though the courts ordered the General Assembly to re-draw in "full public view", a legislator's bias is still present in the process.

On the second day of map-drawing, it occurred to me that the three-judge panel had declared the current map, unconstitutional and here we were debating with elected officials who had the maps been constitutional in the first place, would not have been there.

To debate the process and procedure with bad actors who were only involved because they broke the law and violated the constitution in the first place reminded me of the importance of not only an independent judiciary but also that of an Independent Redistricting Commission. I stood against these maps in caucus, voted no on the Senate floor, and stand against them today. While the maps are fairer, they were approved by an unconstitutional majority.

Explain your answer.

Yes, yes, yes, yes. We have wasted so much time, money and political energy by having partisan politicians drawn their own re-election maps. I have studied this issue extensively, and it makes so much more sense to put the power of redistricting in the hands of the people. Independent commissions are absolutely the best way to do it.

No to both. Public money should be used for public use to build better public schools. Charter and scholarship programs take away from that.

I would not increase the number of charter schools. I would have voted against removing the cap on charter schools in 2011. Charter schools siphon students and resources from traditional public schools and contribute to the re-segregation of North Carolina schools with less accountability than traditional schools. North Carolina’s charter schools are failing to outperform traditional public schools with the number of charters meeting and exceeding annual growth decreasing. As of October 2019, more than 111,000 students were enrolled in 198 Charter schools in North Carolina. State funding has increased from $16.5 million in 1997 when there were 34 schools, to more than $674 million in the 2018-2019 school year (Public Schools First NC). It is very concerning that charter schools can be operated by for-profit charter management organizations. One-fifth of North Carolina’s charter schools are operated by private companies. This brings into question the focus on academic achievement versus profit maximization. Before any more charters can be approved, there must be a moratorium on growth. An in-depth study is necessary to determine the ability of charters to maintain the opportunity for every student to have access to a sound, basic education. An accountability framework must also be developed to ensure new charters are upholding true equity and not exacerbating the issues we are facing today.
I would not increase funding for vouchers/Opportunity Scholarships. The use of school vouchers, which provide families with public dollars to spend on private schools should be eliminated. Vouchers create unnecessary funding strains on traditional public schools and serve as an alternative to adequately funding traditional public schools. Since voucher programs can be used towards private schools, it allows discrimination based on religious preference or sexual identity.

I would vote to restore the cap on charter schools at the current number of approved charter schools. As charter schools fail and close, the cap should decrease with them until we get to 150 approved charter schools. I am against the assemblies action that would add an additional $10 million a year to a program that doesn't fully utilize the line item they currently have. I see these actions as a means to re-segregate our public schools through the scope of "choice." I believe in school choice, just not with taxpayer funds.

The state of North Carolina should not subsidize the re-segregation of our schools.

I also believe charter schools were created as innovation centers to explore different strategies that could improve educational outcomes for our students, we need to return to that because right now, charter schools have become profit centers further highlighting the "haves and the have-not." We need to recommit ourselves to public education in North Carolina and create a statewide universal Pre-K program, expand teacher assistants in K-3 and reduce high-stakes testing, increase starting teacher pay, restore master's pay and the original North Carolina Teaching Fellows Program.

With respect to the first part of the question (the number of charter schools), the cap of 100 was removed in 2012 by the Legislature. Currently there is no cap on charter schools. As for the second part of the question (money for vouchers or Opportunity Scholarships), I believe the Legislature needs to re-evaluate how it allocates the funds for the Opportunity Scholarship Program in light of reports that show the program has been overfunded. There should not be an automatic increase in funding without evidence-based performance results.