Civitas Review Online

The American – here.
Opinion Journal – here.
National Review – here.
Reason – here.
Human Events – here.
(Update: TCS Daily – here.)

The International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW) has been clamoring for a vote at Progress Energy’s Shearon Harris Nuclear plant outside of Raleigh for months, if not years.

Well, guess what, the employees voted and the union got beat.  Bad.

According to the News & Observer, the vote was 499-157 against unionizing.

It’s quite promising to see that despite all the union’s grandstanding and rhetoric that the workers here in North Carolina clearly see that unionization is a bad deal for them and the company they are employed by.

The Charlotte Observer says Phillip Morris’s departure from the Charlotte area is a "downside of globalization." Perhaps. But its also an indication that the government’s witchhunt against Big Tobacco is taking its toll–not to mention NC’s declining business environment and corporate taxation, currently among the worst in the Southeast (nay, the nation). This move also suggests that so-called "economic incentives" don’t work. Put that in your pipe and smoke it. -Max Borders

Thomas Stith audio on the NC General Assembly’s failure to act on a state constitutional amendment protecting private property rights from developers colluding with government.

As Maryland considers following states like Florida and S.C. in (gasp) voucherizing Medicaid, NC is still in the "let’s expand it" phase. In typical fashion, we’ll be five years behind the curve. While other states innovate (even bad innovations like Massachusetts’ Mitt-care) we’ll be figuring out not only that Medicaid is gobbling our state budget, but that government is the least effect means of delivering healthcare goods and services. For now, the DMVification of healthcare proceeds apace.

(Note to Marylanders: Don’t use the v-word. Instead call it a "health credit".)

Every time you hear about Charlotte or some other N.C. city "violating" the ozone standard, remember that the EPA – in order to justify its existence – will keep moving the standard down, down, down asymptotically toward zero. The EPA’s regs on ozone are like a limbo contest. If you want a dose of reality about our so-called environmental protectors, check out this article by Joel Schwartz (who, by the way, is in Raleigh today talking about why Al Gore is wrong.)

Crocodile tears are being shed. 

As the deadline looms July 1 for the "temporary" sales tax increase to expire, and the House and Senate seem to be nowhere close to agreement on whether to extend the tax increase or not, even the supposed "conservative" Democratic House members are stooping to new lows of rhetoric to explain their insatiable desire for more revenue.

Check out this little gem from Rep. Jim Crawford (D-Granville):

"(A tax cut) looks good. It sounds good. But, down the road, folks will be starving, and won’t have any health care," Crawford said. "If that sunsets, I think it will be gone, and it may be another year or two, but we’ll be raising taxes again."

You’ve got to be kidding me.  Boo-hoo.

Let’s just review a little: 
The state budget is scheduled to be around $20.2 billion.
The surplus is scheduled to be around $1.4 billion.
The sales tax expiring will reduce tax collections by $300 million.

You’re telling me that by letting the people of North Carolina keep $300 million of their own money the right honorable elected officials can’t find enough room in a $20 billion budget to "not let people starve or have any health care?"

A tacit rule of blogging: give your opposition credit where it’s due. Rob Schofield deserves credit for at least questioning the kinds of horsetrading, rent-seeking, and corporate welfare that is part and parcel to Senate Bill 3 — the "renewables" bill that is likely to emerge from committee today in Raleigh.

While Schofield apparently caught up the groupthink of climate hysteria, he’s perhaps starting to grasp a little of the deep problems special interests bring to this equation. Big Coal, Big Gas, and Big Nuclear (not to mention Small Pigshit, Small Solar, Small Wind and Small Forestry) are preparing to step into the profitable gaps left by these all-costs-no-benefits climate regs. Schofield reserves most of his animus for all-things-corporate. But there are two sides to every collusive arrangement. And companies play by the rules that are set by government. Such is how unholy alliances are born.

But the scent of the "orgy" is becoming stronger. And Schofield is not alone among those on the left who’re starting to realize it (The Cockburn Trilogy – One, Two, Three – is worth a gander, for example.) Still, climate hysteria is moving many to embrace drastic measures. And the collusion is not just between corporations and government. There is also a strange alliance between ‘watermelons’ (people who find it convenient to believe in anthropogenic GW because they hate corporations; green on the outside, red on the inside) and ‘oil independence’ fetishists on the right who think that slowing trade with the Saudis will somehow control terrorism. "Bipartisan" Groups like the National Commission on Energy Policy (NCEP) love these two existential fears — terrorism and global warming — because they can tap into both and call themselves bipartisan while attempting to rearrange the energy sector as if it were some kind of chessboard. Their work ultimately legitimizes all the porcine activity going on behind the scenes. (I’ll pass over climate scientists at the teat of the IPCC who’re getting BILLIONs in funding to legitimize and expand the power of the UN in the wake of many failures.)
Anyway, I have warned against these unholy alliances elsewhere. (And here and here and here.) So, I’ll join with Schofield in registering my suspicions about Senate Bill 3. While we may not agree on much, we agree that this bill deserves our scrutiny and mistrust. (Speaking of unholy alliances…) -Max Borders

Tanzania has a hit song about privatization. The African country has had far too many years of less-than-competent government controlling its economy. If the ratio of private-to-public sector jobs (currently it’s less than 5-to-1) doesn’t stop sliding in North Carolina, we’re going to need a song of our own.

In a 5-4 ruling, the US Supreme Court struck down a portion of the McCain-Feingold campaign finance regulations that barred corporations, labor unions or any other interest group (527 groups) from airing ads mentioning specific candidates within certain dates of elections in so called "issue ads."  Read more from WaPo here.

The question now is, how does this affect North Carolina law?

In 2004, the NC General Assembly passed H737, which was modeled on the Federal McCain-Feingold electioneering law.

Now, I’m not a Constitutional lawyer, but it would seem that since the US Supreme Court struck down the Federal regulation, the state law (which you can read here) would now be rendered unconstitutional. 

So what does this mean?  It would eliminate the restriction on advocacy ads mentioning specific candidates by name within 30 days of a Primary or 60 days of a General election.  While they can’t specifically say "Vote for/against Candidate X" they would be able to say "Call Candidate X and tell him you think he is wrong on [insert your favorite hot button issue here]."

Let’s get ready to rumble!