If Stein vetoes gun bill, NC House doesn't have the votes to pass it — for now
Good morning and welcome to Under the Dome. I'm Ronni Butts. Here's your update on North Carolina politics.
First up, a dispatch from Capitol Bureau Chief Dawn Vaughan, who covered the controversial vote in the House on Senate Bill 50.
The Senate easily approved a bill that would eliminate the law requiring a permit for concealed carrying of handguns. But the bill stumbled in the House, even as it moved forward.
Democratic Gov. Josh Stein is likely to veto the bill sent to his desk on Wednesday. If it becomes law, it would would mean anyone age 18 and older could carry a concealed gun, without getting a permit that includes firearms training and a background check.
House Republicans are one vote short of a supermajority, which is the three-fifths needed to overturn a veto from Stein. That means Republicans need every one of them to vote for the bill, as well as one Democrat. That didn't happen Wednesday when the bill passed the House after passionate debate.
Instead, all Democrats voted against it. They were joined by two Republicans who also voted against it. Ten Republicans were absent and didn't vote. House Speaker Destin Hall acknowledged to reporters that the math doesn't add up to make the bill become law over Stein's objections.
You can read more about why Republican Reps. Ted Davis and William Brisson opposed the measure in my story from Tuesday, when the bill went through committee, and then my latest from the floor debate and vote itself.
Lawmakers always say they should vote their conscience, constituents and caucus, in that order, which means they should have the freedom to vote how they personally want, and what the people in their district want, before what their party wants. But some lawmakers have previously been threatened with having opponents in their next primary election if they break from their caucus.
I asked Stein's office for comment on the bill but did not hear back by the end of the day.
— Dawn Baumgartner Vaughan
Students from North Carolina's historically Black colleges and universities spoke alongside lawmakers Wednesday to advocate for increased funding for HBCUs as well as for voting rights initiatives.
Rep. Zack Hawkins and Sen. Gladys Robinson, who co-chair the bicameral HBCU Caucus, have both sponsored legislation to appropriate funds to several of the schools, but the bills haven't gotten a hearing.
'It's the ability for us to have a bold and comprehensive piece of legislation that addresses the infrastructure, deferred maintenance and needs holistically for HBCUs,' Hawkins said at a press conference.
Robinson, who is a member of the committee that's supposed to work out a deal on the state budget, said that while their bills may not pass, she's confident the budget will fund some HBCU improvements.
Students at Wednesday's press conference also spoke against gerrymandering and advocated for the legislature to adopt an independent redistricting process.
The General Assembly needs 'to take action to establish a redistricting process that is truly by the people and for the people of North Carolina,' said Mackenzie Grant, an N.C. A&T State University and HBCU Student Action Alliance fellow at Common Cause NC, a voting rights group.
She mentioned that a previous electoral map had split her university campus in half between two different voting districts.
Nyla Hankins, an NC A&T student and fellow with Common Cause NC, spoke out against a House bill that would make disseminating official voter registration forms as part of registration drives a misdemeanor. Instead, organizations would have to present voters with sample forms.
'We should be maintaining and widening access to voter registration,' Hankins said. 'Not merely banning it, as this bill proposes to do.'
The bill in question, House Bill 127, has not gotten a committee hearing. It was scheduled to be heard in an elections committee last week, but lawmakers canceled the meeting shortly before it was set to begin.
— Ronni Butts and Kyle Ingram
Duke University's Sanford School of Public Policy is bringing Michael Regan, the former administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency under President Joe Biden, to its campus as a Polis Distinguished Fellow. Regan, a North Carolina native, served as Secretary of the N.C. Department of Environmental Quality under then-Gov. Roy Cooper.
Polis Distinguished Fellows are experts in public service, organizing or politics who work with students on a project to address a specific political issue, according to Duke's website.
Beginning in August, Regan will participate in the Civil Discourse Project, which aims to 'promote civil discourse through modeling or teaching the capacities and virtues necessary to engage in healthy exchange across difference.' While at the EPA, part of his work focused on addressing climate change and environmental justice through the Office of Environmental Justice and External Civil Rights.
▪ Accuracy in Media, an activist media organization, posted a video Tuesday of a former Western Carolina University administrator implying to undercover reporters that diversity, equity and inclusion efforts will continue to be made at the university, despite recent state and federal policies banning DEI policies in educational institutions.
Korie Dean reported that the university released a statement assuring that it complies with those policies. Officials say the now-retired administrator in the video had no authority to enforce DEI policies. This is the third video posted by Accuracy in Media in recent weeks of UNC System administrators who made similar DEI comments.
▪ A bill to expand the use of ignition locks is awaiting a vote in the Senate, weeks after House approval, Richard Stradling reported. Under the bill, ignition locks could be used voluntarily by those awaiting a court date with charges of driving while impaired to help reduce punishment. Ignition locks, which require a driver to blow into a device to detect alcohol content before starting their vehicle, are already required for some charged with a DWI. 'The main intent behind this bill is to give people an avenue to take accountability when they screw up or make mistakes,' Rep. Mike Schietzelt said at a press conference on Tuesday.
▪ Lawmakers are considering requiring all North Carolina public school teachers to complete a criminal background check before being hired, T. Keung Hui reported. Currently, it is optional for North Carolina public schools to run criminal background checks on prospective teachers. Some Democrats are leery about the bill because of concerns about costs. North Carolina received an F score from USA Today for teacher screening in 2016.
▪ Karen Brinson Bell spoke with politics reporter Kyle Ingram about her reflections on her six years as the North Carolina State Board of Elections director. She was ousted from her position last month after the General Assembly transferred the power to appoint board members to State Auditor Dave Boliek. Brinson Bell recounted how she and the board navigated unexpected challenges like the COVID-19 pandemic, Hurricane Helene and the six-month-long battle over a State Supreme Court seat between Allison Riggs and Jefferson Griffin. Sam Hayes, the North Carolina House speaker's general counsel since 2021, took her place after a 3-2 vote of the new board.
▪ The Trump administration has renewed support for a new bridge under construction over the Alligator River, which will connect the Outer Banks and the rest of the state. The construction is partially funded by a $110 million federal grant using money from the infrastructure bill passed under former President Joe Biden. President Donald Trump's administration says the grant was backlogged under the Biden administration and will now move ahead. The new bridge, which is set to be complete in 2029, will replace the current 60-year-old Lindsay C. Warren Bridge. Richard Stradling has more.
Today's newsletter was by Ronni Butts, Dawn Baumgartner Vaughan and Kyle Ingram. Check your inbox Friday for more #ncpol.
Not a subscriber? Sign up on our website to receive Under the Dome in your inbox daily.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
16 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Fed Versus Trump on Tariffs Impact Will Soon Be Put to the Test
(Bloomberg) -- It's a widely held belief among economists that President Donald Trump's tariffs will boost inflation notably over the next few months. But muted price increases so far have called that assumption into question, emboldening the White House and opening up divisions at the Federal Reserve. Philadelphia Transit System Votes to Cut Service by 45%, Hike Fares Squeezed by Crowds, the Roads of Central Park Are Being Reimagined Sao Paulo Pushes Out Favela Residents, Drug Users to Revive Its City Center Sprawl Is Still Not the Answer Mapping the Architectural History of New York's Chinatown Anticipation of firmer inflation has kept the US central bank from delivering interest-rate cuts this year as it waits to see what happens. The Trump administration is applying intense pressure on Fed Chair Jerome Powell to bring down borrowing costs, and two Fed governors in recent days have publicly diverged from Powell by asserting a cut could be appropriate as soon as July. A pair of key reports in the coming weeks — the monthly jobs report due Thursday and another on consumer prices due July 15 — will be critical in determining the central bank's next steps. Both are expected to finally begin reflecting the impact of tariffs, but any surprises could change the schedule for rate cuts. 'One of the things that makes it such a difficult situation is that we simply haven't done this sort of experiment in the past,' William English, a professor at the Yale School of Management and former high-ranking Fed economist, said of the tariffs. 'We're outside the range of experience for a modern US economy, and so it's very difficult to be confident about any forecast.' Trump and his allies have escalated attacks on the Fed and Powell in recent weeks, motivated by data showing inflation remained tame through May despite the tariffs put in place. The president has lobbed several insults at Powell, calling him a 'numbskull' and 'truly one of the dumbest, and most destructive, people in Government.' Other Trump administration officials and some congressional Republicans — oftentimes more reticent to weigh in on monetary policy — have joined in as well. Kevin Hassett, director of the White House National Economic Council, said on June 23 that there is 'no reason at all for the Fed not to cut rates right now.' Hassett, who is seen as a possible replacement for Powell when the Fed chair's term expires next year, emphasized data due in the coming weeks: 'I would guess that if they see one more month of data, they're going to really have to concede that they've got the rate way too high,' he said. The debate reflects the delicate situation the Fed is in as it aims to avoid a policy mistake. Should officials cut rates just as tariff-induced price pressures kick in, they may have to resort to more aggressive measures later on. But holding rates at an elevated level to combat inflation that never materializes risks restraining the economy unnecessarily, potentially damaging the labor market in the process. Forecasters expect inflation to accelerate in the coming months. Powell told Congress in testimony last week he expects 'meaningful' price increases to materialize in June, July and August data as the levies work their way through the economy. But he added Fed officials are 'perfectly open to the idea' the impact could be smaller than feared, 'and if so, that'll matter for our policy.' The Bureau of Labor Statistics will publish its report on consumer prices for June on July 15, two weeks before the central bank's next policy meeting. Fed Governors Christopher Waller and Michelle Bowman — both Trump appointees — have broken step with Powell and their other colleagues to raise the possibility of a rate cut next month if the data cooperate. 'I think we've got room to bring it down, and then we can kind of see what happens with inflation,' Waller said in a June 20 CNBC interview, adding the central bank could always bring a halt to rate cuts again if necessary. 'We've been on pause for six months to wait and see, and so far the data has been fine.' Still, investors currently see only about a 20% chance of a July move and are instead betting the next cut will come in September, according to federal funds futures. Tariff Math Benign inflation readings through May suggest companies are finding ways, at least for now, to avoid price hikes despite Trump's tariffs on dozens of US trading partners — and widespread uncertainty over how long the duties will last and the level where they'll ultimately settle. One potential explanation is companies are working through inventories of imports they frontloaded in the first quarter to get ahead of the levies, said Josh Hirt, a senior US economist at Vanguard Group. Hirt's calculations suggest that, on average, importers this year have paid an effective tariff rate lower than what Trump has put in place, largely because so much was brought in before they took effect. Another source of uncertainty Powell discussed in his testimony is just how the costs of the tariffs will be split between exporters, importers, retailers, manufacturers and consumers. 'In the beginning, it will be the importer that pays the tariff, but ultimately it will be spread out among those five,' Powell said, adding that data suggests at least some of the impact will fall on consumers. What Bloomberg Economics Says... 'After a brief lull in April and early May, container traffic from China to the US is rising again, with year-to-date import volumes on pace to exceed normal levels at least through summer. If that pace is sustained, US store shelves should be well-stocked at the holiday season. That likely means less need for firms to pass on tariff costs this year.' — Estelle Ou and Andrej Sokol, economists Before the July 15 inflation report comes equally consequential monthly data on employment, due from the BLS on July 3. So far this year, there's been little indication that tariffs have put a dent in hiring, which has allowed the Fed chair and many of his colleagues to maintain that a solid labor market means there's no rush to cut rates. But as with the inflation data, forecasters have largely maintained that any potential labor-market impact of the trade policy upheaval wouldn't be visible before the release of the June figures. In a Bloomberg survey, economists said they expect the this week's report will show the unemployment rate in June crept up to 4.3%, which would mark the highest level since 2021. Bowman, in a June 23 speech, said Fed officials should 'recognize that downside risks to our employment mandate could soon become more salient, given recent softness in spending and signs of fragility in the labor market.' Monthly consumer spending figures published Friday by the Bureau of Economic Analysis showed a drop in outlays in May as households pulled back on discretionary services like travel and dining, and forecasters warned higher prices in the months ahead would put more pressure on consumption. English, at Yale, said the impact of tariffs will depend on factors which are difficult to measure. But 'the kind of intuition that there's going to be some pass-through of the tariffs to prices just feels right,' he said. 'I am not yet thinking that the basic story is wrong.' America's Top Consumer-Sentiment Economist Is Worried How to Steal a House Inside Gap's Last-Ditch, Tariff-Addled Turnaround Push Apple Test-Drives Big-Screen Movie Strategy With F1 Does a Mamdani Victory and Bezos Blowback Mean Billionaires Beware? ©2025 Bloomberg L.P.
The Hill
25 minutes ago
- The Hill
Senate Republicans are in a sprint on Trump's big bill after a weekend of setbacks
WASHINGTON (AP) — After a weekend of setbacks, the Senate will try to sprint ahead Monday on President Donald Trump's big bill of tax breaks and spending cuts despite a series of challenges, including the sudden announcement from one GOP senator that he won't run for reelection after opposing the package over its Medicaid health care cuts. An all-night session to consider an endless stream of proposed amendments to the package, in what's called a vote-a-rama, was abruptly postponed, and it's now scheduled to launch as soon as the Senate gavels open. With Democrats united against the Republican president's legislation and eagerly lined up to challenge it, the voting could take all day. Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer of New York said the 'hardest choices' for Republicans are still to come. His side plans to bring 'amendment after amendment after amendment to the floor, so Republicans can defend their billionaire tax cuts and so they can try to explain their massive cuts to Medicaid to people back home.' The hours ahead will be pivotal for the Republicans, who have control of the Congress and are racing against Trump's Fourth of July deadline to wrap up work. The 940-page 'One Big Beautiful Bill Act,' as it is now formally titled, has consumed the Congress as its shared priority with the president, with no room politically to fail, even as not all Republicans are on board. A new analysis from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office found that 11.8 million more Americans would become uninsured by 2034 if the bill became law. It also said the package would increase the deficit by nearly $3.3 trillion over the decade. House Speaker Mike Johnson's leadership team has recalled lawmakers back to Washington for voting in the House as soon as Wednesday, if the legislation can first clear the Senate. But the outcome remains uncertain, especially after a weekend of work in the Senate that brought less visible progress on securing enough Republican support, over Democratic opposition, for passage. Few Republicans appear fully satisfied as the final package emerges. GOP Sen. Thom Tillis of North Carolina, who announced Sunday he would not seek reelection after Trump badgered him over his opposition to the package, said he has the same goals as Trump, cutting taxes and spending. But Tillis said this package is a betrayal of the president's promises not to kick people off health care, especially if rural hospitals close. 'We could take the time to get this right,' he thundered. At the same time, some loosely aligned conservative Senate Republicans — Rick Scott of Florida, Mike Lee of Utah, Ron Johnson of Wisconsin and Cynthia Lummis of Wyoming — have pushed for steeper cuts, particularly to health care, drawing their own warning from Trump. 'Don't go too crazy!' the president posted on social media. 'REMEMBER, you still have to get reelected.' GOP leaders barely secured enough support to muscle the legislation past a procedural Saturday night hurdle in a tense scene. A handful of Republican holdouts revolted, and it took phone calls from Trump and a visit from Vice President JD Vance to keep it on track. As Saturday's vote tally teetered, attention turned to Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, who was surrounded by GOP leaders in intense conversation. She voted 'yes.' Several provisions in the package including a higher tax deduction for native whalers and potential waivers from food stamps or Medicaid changes are being called the 'Polar Payoff' designed for her state. But some were found to be out of compliance with the rules by the Senate parliamentarian. All told, the Senate bill includes some $4 trillion in tax cuts, making permanent Trump's 2017 rates, which would expire at the end of the year if Congress fails to act, while adding the new ones he campaigned on, including no taxes on tips. The Senate package would roll back billions of dollars in green energy tax credits that Democrats warn will wipe out wind and solar investments nationwide and impose $1.2 trillion in cuts, largely to Medicaid and food stamps, by imposing work requirements, making sign-up eligibility more stringent and changing federal reimbursements to states. Additionally, the bill would provide a $350 billion infusion for border and national security, including for deportations, some of it paid for with new fees charged to immigrants. Unable to stop the march toward passage, the Democrats as the minority party in Congress are using the tools at their disposal to delay and drag out the process. Democrats forced a full reading of the text, which took 16 hours. Then Democratic senators took over Sunday's debate, filling the chamber with speeches, while Republicans largely stood aside. 'Reckless and irresponsible,' said Sen. Gary Peters, a Democrat from Michigan. 'A gift to the billionaire class,' said Vermont's Sen. Bernie Sanders, an independent who caucuses with Democrats. 'Follow what the Bible teaches us: Do unto others as you would have them do unto you,' said Sen. Ben Ray Lujan, D-N.M., as Sunday's debate pushed past midnight. Sen. Patty Murray of Washington, the ranking Democrat on the Appropriations Committee, raised particular concern about the accounting method being used by the Republicans, which says the tax breaks from Trump's first term are now 'current policy' and the cost of extending them should not be counted toward deficits. 'In my 33 years here in the United States Senate, things have never — never — worked this way,' said Murray, the longest-serving Democrat on the Budget Committee. She said that kind of 'magic math' won't fly with Americans trying to balance their own household books. 'Go back home,' she said, 'and try that game with your constituents.' ___ Associated Press writers Ali Swenson, Fatima Hussein and Michelle L. Price contributed to this report.
New York Times
26 minutes ago
- New York Times
Trump Administration Live Updates: Senate to Begin Voting on Policy Bill, as G.O.P. Grasps for Support
Provisions added to the president's domestic policy bill to help win the support of Senator Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, center, violated Senate rules and may need to be dropped. The Senate opened debate on Sunday on the embattled Republican tax cuts and domestic policy bill, as G.O.P. leaders toiled to build enough support in their own ranks to push it through before a Fourth of July deadline set by President Trump. The bitter floor fight began in earnest after Senate clerks devoted almost 16 consecutive hours to reading aloud the 940-page bill. Democrats insisted on the reading as a protest and to delay the final showdown, stalling a vote on passage to Monday at the earliest. Late Sunday night, Republicans, still laboring to marshal backing for the measure, delayed a marathon series of votes on amendments to it, which had been expected to begin overnight, until Monday morning. Still, Republicans took to the floor to hail the legislation, which extends a broad array of tax cuts enacted in 2017 during the first Trump administration and boosts spending on the military and border security, while making steep cuts to Medicaid and federal nutrition assistance to pay for them. 'It's a big, beautiful bill if you believe in cutting people's taxes, securing the border, having a strong military and controlling government spending,' Senator Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina and chairman of the Budget Committee, said, using the name bestowed upon the legislation by Mr. Trump. Democrats assailed the bill, which also would increase the federal debt limit by $5 trillion, noting that it was projected to significantly increase the deficit and deny essential safety net programs to millions of Americans in order to provide tax benefits mainly to the wealthiest. 'This is a recipe for disaster,' said Senator Gary Peters, Democrat of Michigan, calling the legislation reckless and unconscionable. In a stark display of the political peril for Republicans around the bill, Senator Thom Tillis, Republican of North Carolina, one of the party's most vulnerable incumbents, suddenly announced Sunday that he would not run for re-election next year after voting against bringing the bill to the floor. His opposition had drawn a harsh rebuke from Mr. Trump, who threatened to recruit a primary opponent to challenge him. Later, in a scathing speech on the Senate floor, Mr. Tillis assailed the bill and Mr. Trump, saying the measure was a betrayal of the president's promise to protect Medicaid and warning that his party was 'about to make a mistake.' But Republicans were determined to plunge ahead. As the debate began, they used an accounting gimmick to upend longstanding budget rules and unilaterally declare that extending the tax cuts, estimated to cost roughly $3.8 trillion over a decade, would add nothing to the federal deficit. The move amounted to a substantial blow to the filibuster: It effectively lets Republicans ignore budgeting rules that are meant to prevent adding to the deficit, while still availing themselves of a special process that allows them to pass their bill with a simple majority vote, rather than the 60 votes required to overcome a filibuster. Democrats called the maneuver a trick that would pave the way for disastrous policies. 'Rather than be honest with the American people about the true costs of their billionaire giveaways, Republicans are doing something the Senate has never, never done before, deploying fake math and accounting gimmicks to hide the true cost of their bill,' said Senator Chuck Schumer, Democrat of New York and the minority leader. But Republicans said they were within their rights and were prepared to roll over the Democratic objections. Even as the endgame drew nearer for the legislation, it continued to change as several Republicans remained unsatisfied with it. The Senate official who enforces the chamber's rules determined that two last-minute provisions — added on Saturday to benefit Alaska and Hawaii and help secure the vote of Senator Lisa Murkowski, Republican of Alaska — violated Senate rules and would likely need to be dropped from the bill, according to an aide. Those provisions had been seen as crucial to winning the support of Ms. Murkowski on the initial procedural vote that narrowly passed late Saturday night 51 to 49, with two Republicans and all Democrats opposed. It was uncertain whether she would still back the legislation if those sweeteners were dropped. The ruling by the chamber official, the Senate parliamentarian, involved a special boost to the two states' Medicaid payment rates and one to the prices Medicare pays hospitals in those states for some medical services. Adding to the uncertainty around the measure were new estimates by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, which showed that it would pile at least $3.3 trillion on the already-bulging national debt over a decade, nearly $1 trillion more than the version passed by the House. That could pose big problems for the measure in the House, which must give it final approval. Fiscal hawks there have warned that the price tag of the measure must not rise. The C.B.O. also reported that the Senate version of the measure would result in deeper cuts in federal support for health insurance and in more Americans losing coverage than the House version, underscoring the political risks for Republicans. The analysis found that the legislation would leave 11.8 million more Americans uninsured by 2034. Federal spending on Medicaid, Medicare and Obamacare would be reduced by more than $1.1 trillion over that period, with more than $1 trillion of those cuts coming from Medicaid alone. Image Senator Susan Collins, Republican of Maine, wants to offer an amendment to revert the tax rate for the most affluent Americans to the level before the 2017 tax cuts were enacted. Credit... Tierney L. Cross/The New York Times Once the clerks finished their reading, the clock started on 20 hours of debate on the legislation, evenly split between the two parties, though Republicans were not expected to use all their time. At the end of the debate, members of both parties would have the opportunity to offer more changes and force floor votes on those amendments in an hourslong process known as a vote-a-rama. The resolution of those amendments could be crucial to determining the fate of the bill when senators cast their final votes. For instance, Senator Susan Collins, Republican of Maine, wants to offer an amendment to revert the tax rate for the most affluent Americans to the level before the 2017 tax cuts were enacted, generating new revenue. Ms. Collins voted to open the debate on Saturday but told Republican leaders that her vote did not represent a commitment to support the final bill. A group of hard-right conservatives who held out for four hours on Saturday night before agreeing to begin debate also want changes to produce greater savings in Medicaid, a proposal that could weaken support from other senators worried about health care cuts in their states. Democrats are dug in against the proposal. On CNN's 'State of the Union,' Senator Mark Warner, Democrat of Virginia, warned on Sunday that 16 million Americans could lose their health care coverage under the bill. The cuts could make health care more expensive and have a 'ripple effect to all of us who have traditional health care as well,' he added, setting the total number of uninsured back to 'where we were before Obamacare.' But Senator Katie Britt, Republican of Alabama, appearing on the same program, dismissed recent polls showing a lack of support for the bill. She maintained that Americans would greatly benefit and said she was excited about the bill's potential. 'I think when the American people actually get to see this in fruition, they absolutely are going to be, too,' Ms. Britt said. Andrew Duehren , Margot Sanger-Katz and Annie Karni contributed reporting.
