House District 40: Phil Rubin

Name: Phil Rubin

Age: 43

Party affiliation: Democrat

Occupation & employer: Legislator and attorney, serving in the NC House since 2025.

Years lived in the area: 12 years.

1. What in your background qualifies you to represent the people of your North Carolina district effectively? What would you cite as your three biggest career accomplishments?

“I bring significant experience as an advocate and a policy analyst. I spent most of my career as a federal prosecutor here in Raleigh before serving as a Special Deputy Attorney General at the NC Department of Justice. Both jobs required me to make persuasive arguments, answer tough questions, and exercise sound judgment under pressure. In the private sector, I worked on policies to keep terrorist and hate groups off social media platforms. That work required close attention to the details of policy proposals and the practical challenges of putting them to work in the real world.

Those skills have been tremendously useful in the North Carolina House. For example, I identified language in a gang-violence bill that risked repeating constitutional problems I had spent years litigating in federal court. I worked with the Republican sponsors and the Conference of District Attorneys to revise it, helping ensure that convictions under the legislation would withstand legal challenges. My amendment passed the House unanimously, 112–0, something that is rare for the minority given how the General Assembly is run. That is the kind of substantive, practical work I bring to representing my district: understanding the details, identifying problems, and bringing people together to solve them.

Three of my biggest career accomplishments are:

Defending the SAFE Child Act. I led the State’s defense at the trial court level of this landmark law, which expanded the opportunity for survivors of child sexual abuse to seek civil damages from those responsible. The North Carolina Supreme Court ultimately upheld the law’s revival provision unanimously.
Protecting voting rights during President Obama’s 2012 campaign. As a Regional Voter Protection Director in Virginia, I worked to help eligible voters exercise their right to vote and have their ballots counted, including recruiting, training, and organizing over 1,100 attorneys to serve as poll observers. That work remains a foundation of my commitment to protecting access to the ballot and ensuring that the government is accountable to the people.
Protecting victims and families from repeat violent offenders. As an Assistant United States Attorney, I led complex litigation over which offenses qualify as violent crimes under federal law. I fought to uphold lawful convictions and sentences in cases where those difficult legal questions had real consequences for victims, their families, and public safety.”

2. What do you believe to be the three most pressing issues facing the next General Assembly? What steps do you believe the state should take to address them?

1. The cost of living emergency.

Constituents constantly tell me about the strain of paying for utilities, healthcare, groceries, and housing. Federal Republican policies have contributed to those pressures, while Republicans in the General Assembly have made choices that push still more costs onto families.

We should repeal the Duke Energy bill (SB 266), which allows utilities to charge customers financing costs for power plants before those plants are operating. We should pass the Affordability in Healthcare Act (HB 1175), which I cosponsored and would require enforceable upfront cost estimates, restrict hospital facility fees, and more.

We must also invest in affordable housing, childcare, energy efficiency, public schools, and infrastructure. When the state neglects these responsibilities, the costs don’t disappear. Families pay through higher local taxes, out-of-pocket expenses, longer commutes, and fewer opportunities. Affordability requires looking at the whole household budget and making investments that actually improve it.

2. North Carolina’s crumbling democracy.

Many of our problems persist because decision-makers are insulated from accountability. Political gerrymandering is central to that problem. For 15 years, Republican leaders have increasingly used the levers of government mainly to keep their hands on those levers.

I cosponsored the Fair Maps Act (HB 20) to establish independent redistricting and am a primary sponsor of the Judge Joe John Nonpartisan Judicial Elections Act (HB 129). People deserve meaningful electoral choices and courts that apply the law fairly.

My Restoring Separation of Powers & Legislative Transparency bill (HB 1235) would require bill text to be public for 48 hours before final passage, with a narrow emergency exception; generally require single-subject legislation; and prohibit unrelated provisions and wholesale rewrites that change a bill’s original purpose. It would also strengthen constitutional protections against partisan legislative efforts to strip executive authority.

People deserve an opportunity to understand, question, and influence legislation before it becomes law.

3. Real property tax reform, which requires funding education.

Rising property taxes can threaten people’s ability to remain in homes they have owned for decades, particularly when their incomes have not kept pace with rising property values.

The General Assembly already has the authority to enact property-tax levy limits without a constitutional amendment. So why are Republican leaders asking voters to amend the Constitution to require the legislature to set an unspecified levy limit? They could put a concrete proposal before us right now. I suspect it is because they know that a levy limit won’t lower people’s property taxes and won’t do anything to address the legislature’s massive role in driving up local property taxes. I discuss the amendment further below, in question 4.

Wake County estimates that it is covering $600 million in state funding gaps in fiscal year 2026, including substantial public-school operating costs. When the state fails to adequately fund those needs, counties must fill the gap, and local property taxpayers get the bill. Real reform must start with the state meeting its responsibilities.

We should also pass targeted relief that helps people stay in their homes. My Senior Property Tax Relief Modernization Act (HB 1179) would expand relief for seniors and disabled homeowners, replace an abrupt income cutoff with a gradual phaseout, allow eligible homeowners to combine relief programs, and address barriers involving inherited homes and shared ownership. Other Democratic proposals, including Reform NC Property Tax (HB 1092), would further enable relief tailored to a homeowner’s ability to pay.

Homeowners deserve solutions that lower their costs and keep their communities strong. If we did these things, we could actually lower property taxes in a meaningful way.

3. Federal cuts to Medicaid are expected to cost the state $50 billion over the next decade, according to the N.C. Department of Health and Human Services. How would you address Medicaid funding to maintain coverage for the millions of North Carolinians enrolled?

“Protecting Medicaid is both a responsibility to our people and sound fiscal policy. Losing insurance does not eliminate someone’s need for healthcare; it can turn manageable conditions into expensive emergencies, leaving patients, hospitals, and communities with larger bills. Medicaid helps prevent those crises, and the federal government pays 90% of covered medical costs for Medicaid expansion. Preserving coverage protects people’s health while keeping substantial federal funding in North Carolina.

I would halt the scheduled corporate income tax cuts and support a fairer tax structure to sustain coverage. Reserves can bridge immediate shortfalls, but continuing funding losses require continuing revenue. We should also scrutinize managed-care administrative spending and hold insurers accountable, while avoiding indiscriminate provider-payment cuts that drive doctors and therapists out of Medicaid or destabilize hospitals. Maintaining coverage means ensuring there are providers available to deliver care.

The new federal requirements also threaten to push eligible people off Medicaid through paperwork and administrative barriers. The state should fund county social-services staff, reliable technology, and enrollment assistance, using existing information to verify eligibility wherever permitted and ensuring people receive every available exemption and protection. Counties should have the resources to do that work without passing another bill to property taxpayers.

Finally, I would work with our congressional delegation to reverse the federal cuts. Their scale demands federal action, but North Carolina must use its own budget and administrative authority to protect people’s care in the meantime.”

4. The General Assembly has voted to put a constitutional amendment on ballots that, if passed, would put a cap on property tax increases. Do you support the amendment? Why or why not?

“I don’t support the amendment, and it is fundamentally misleading. As I noted above, the General Assembly could already enact a levy limit without this amendment. It doesn’t even specify a cap—it leaves the actual limits and exceptions for the legislature to decide later. Voters deserve to know what they’re being asked to approve.

The fundamental problem is that Republican legislators have pushed costs down to counties to make room for their personal and corporate income tax cuts. Wake County alone estimates it filled $600 million in state funding gaps in FY2026. Those tax cuts disproportionately benefit wealthy people and corporations. You’re paying more in property taxes so wealthy people can pay less in income taxes. That’s wrong.

This amendment won’t fix that. Republicans should explain why they’re asking voters to approve an unspecified limit that they already have the authority to enact—and how restricting counties’ revenue will solve a problem caused by making counties pay the state’s bills. Real property tax relief starts with the state paying its share.”

5. How would you address the rising costs of housing, childcare, and basic necessities facing North Carolina families?

“People should be able to thrive in their local communities. That means tackling the costs families face and making sure their wages can cover the basics.

On housing, we need more homes people can actually afford. I’ve cosponsored legislation to allow housing in commercial areas, help local governments speed up approvals, finance workforce housing, and limit large corporate purchases of single-family homes (HB 1056). These proposals address both the shortage of housing and the difficulty families face competing with corporate investors. My property tax relief legislation would also help seniors and people with disabilities stay in their homes (HB 1179).

On childcare, parents need affordable care, providers need to stay open, and childcare workers need to earn a living. I’ve cosponsored legislation to reduce families’ copayments for subsidized childcare from 10% to 7% of income (HB 1160). I also support redirecting private-school voucher funding toward reducing childcare waitlists, increasing compensation for childcare workers, and making permanent the Tri-Share program, which divides costs equally among participating employers, eligible families, and the state (HB 1066). Affordable childcare also makes it possible for parents to work, which grows family budgets and the economy.

For other household bills, I would repeal the Duke Energy bill (SB 266) and advance healthcare reforms I’ve cosponsored requiring enforceable upfront cost estimates, restricting facility fees, and creating a lower-cost health insurance option (HB 1175). We also need to raise the minimum wage so working families can afford groceries and everyday necessities.

These investments require changing our budget priorities. We should stop sacrificing the services families depend on to pay for more corporate income tax cuts.”

6. Climate disasters are intensifying: Hurricane Helene devastated Western North Carolina in 2024, Tropical Storm Chantal flooded the Triangle in 2025, and coastal erosion threatens the Outer Banks. With much affordable housing located in flood-prone areas and FEMA resources stretched thin, what is your plan for climate resilience and disaster relief?

“Helene and Chantal have made clear that disaster preparedness is a statewide responsibility. We need reliable recovery funding and sustained investment before the next storm hits.

First, the state must help people recover promptly. That means emergency housing, rebuilding assistance, restoring essential infrastructure, and helping local governments secure federal funding and meet matching requirements. With federal support uncertain, we should use state reserves for urgent needs, something we haven’t done enough with Helene, and preserve revenue for long-term recovery. Assistance should come with clear deadlines and public reporting on whether it is actually reaching people.

Second, we need predictable state funding for stormwater systems, aging dams, bridges, culverts, and water infrastructure. Projects should be prioritized by risk, community need, and the damage they can prevent. Protecting wetlands and floodplains, restoring coastal dunes, and planning around current flood and erosion risks should be part of our prevention strategy.

Third, affordable housing must also be safe housing. We should direct housing investments toward safer locations, help residents elevate or strengthen existing homes where practical, and offer voluntary buyouts and relocation assistance where the risks are too great. Those efforts must include renters and replacement housing people can actually afford, so reducing flood risk doesn’t simply displace families.

Finally, we have to address climate change itself through clean energy, storage, and efficiency. The Balcony Solar bill (HB 1129), which I helped introduce, would expand access to small solar systems, including for renters. Preparing for worsening disasters and reducing the pollution driving them are both responsibilities we owe future generations.”

7. The General Assembly recently passed a new congressional redistricting map. This marks the state’s seventh congressional map since 2016. How do you view the most recent redistricting? And do you support independent redistricting processes, or do you believe the legislature should retain this power?

Partisan gerrymandering is unconstitutional and immoral. I oppose the latest congressional map because it is another attempt to protect Republican power from the voters who should determine whether Republicans keep it.

The Constitution of the United States guarantees to every state a representative democracy. Contorting electoral maps for the express purpose of avoiding the people’s will—and their anger at this administration—destroys representative democracy. Our State Constitution guarantees free elections, and that clause, too, prohibits rigging electoral districts for political gain. Judges who have refused to enforce those guarantees are wrong on the Constitution—and somehow, always in a way that seems to benefit their own politics.

We should amend both the North Carolina Constitution and the United States Constitution to overrule those decisions and prohibit partisan gerrymandering in no uncertain terms, settling the issue definitively and uniformly.

I support independent redistricting and cosponsored the Fair Maps Act (HB 20), which would establish an independent commission to draw congressional and legislative districts. But independence alone is not enough: we also need constitutional rules prohibiting political gerrymandering regardless of who draws the maps.

Gerrymandering isn’t just a technical issue. The same practice that distorts our congressional maps also shields the General Assembly from accountability. In North Carolina, it has hollowed out the Republican Party, leaving it working mainly for special interests. In too many districts, the primary is the only meaningful election, and party bosses can heavily sway primaries. Representatives become more concerned with keeping party leaders happy than answering to the people they represent.

That invites unaccountability. It has helped produce things like the Duke Energy bill (SB 266) that raised your electric costs; it has allowed the legislature to pass costs down to counties while cutting corporate income taxes, putting pressure on your property taxes; and it has let them get away with underfunding public schools, jeopardizing our state’s future. In a functioning democracy, representatives have to answer to voters for those choices. A better future for North Carolina requires a legislature whose majority can change when voters are angry.

8. North Carolina ranks near the bottom nationally in teacher pay. How would you address teacher compensation, and what will you do to ensure a budget passes that adequately funds education?

“Public education is the foundation of North Carolina’s future and the cornerstone of a functioning democracy. Our children’s opportunities and our state’s economic strength depend on having excellent teachers—and paying them enough to build a career here. Underpaying teachers is a choice that will cost us far more over time.

That’s why I created the NC Teacher Pay Competitiveness Act (HB 1178). It would establish automatic annual raises aimed at reaching the Southeastern average by 2032, restore master’s-degree pay, and create a dedicated Teacher Salary Reserve so raises can continue through budget impasses. It also greatly reduces scheduled private-school voucher spending. Republican leaders protected automatic funding increases for vouchers; our public-school teachers deserve that long-term commitment.

I will work across the aisle and with the governor to build support for a timely budget that funds competitive pay, classroom resources, and support staff. If broader negotiations stall, I’ll push to move education funding separately. We also have to preserve the revenue needed to make those commitments sustainable, including stopping further corporate tax cuts. Teachers and students should be able to plan their futures without waiting for the legislature to finish its political fights.”

9. North Carolina currently has a 12-week abortion ban with certain exceptions. Some legislators have proposed further restrictions. Do you support the current law, believe access should be expanded, or would you support further restrictions?

“These decisions should be between patients and their medical providers. I oppose the 12-week ban, will oppose further restrictions, and support expanding access. I’m proud to have the endorsement of Planned Parenthood Votes.

North Carolina’s abortion restrictions have already driven OB/GYNs to choose work in other states—I know some of them personally. Doctors face uncertainty about whether providing medically appropriate care could expose them to legal liability. That uncertainty has delayed treatment and prompted transfers between hospitals even when care could legally be provided locally. Losing providers and delaying care puts women and babies at risk, including during pregnancies families desperately want to continue.

A woman experiencing a dangerous pregnancy complication should not have to become sicker while doctors and lawyers determine whether she qualifies for an exception. Medical providers need to be able to exercise their professional judgment, and patients deserve the freedom to make deeply personal decisions about their bodies and futures.

It is profoundly sad and immoral to take reproductive freedom away from women in the name of “life” while watching more than 500,000 children in our state face hunger—and failing to act with anything approaching the same urgency to feed them.”

10. Federal legislation will ban most hemp-derived THC products, like Delta-8, by December 2026, threatening North Carolina’s hemp industry. Meanwhile, recreational marijuana remains illegal and medical marijuana bills have stalled. What is your position on hemp regulation and would you address the upcoming federal ban, if at all?

“I support strong, enforceable regulation of consumable hemp. There is substantial common ground, including within the industry, on what that should accomplish: keep these products away from children, require independent testing for potency and contaminants, and ensure that ingredients meet evidence-based safety standards. Consumers should be able to trust the label, and businesses that sell or market to children, or who misrepresent their products, should face swift and meaningful consequences.

We can establish those protections while preserving North Carolina’s hemp businesses and the jobs they support. Responsible producers and retailers deserve clear, consistent rules, and the state needs the resources to enforce them.

I oppose simply copying the federal ban into North Carolina law. There are already bipartisan efforts in Congress to revise that approach, and we should not lock our state into a sweeping prohibition that Congress may reconsider. I would urge our congressional delegation to replace the ban with workable safety standards, while advancing state legislation focused on protecting children, ensuring product safety, and holding businesses accountable.”

11. Iryna’s Law eliminates cashless bail, requires mental health evaluations for certain defendants, and attempts to restart the death penalty by requiring alternative execution methods if lethal injection is unavailable. The law also accelerates death penalty appeals. Where do you stand on the death penalty and these criminal justice reforms?

“From my time as a federal prosecutor, I believe strongly in accountability for the most serious crimes and in the government’s responsibility to protect the public. I also know that the criminal justice system is complex, and the causes of crime are equally so. I voted against Iryna’s Law (HB 307) because it failed to fund the treatment, staffing, and detention capacity needed to make its promises meaningful.

As I explained on the House floor, pretrial detention should turn on danger, not wealth. If someone cannot safely be released, they should remain detained regardless of how much money they can post. If they can safely be released, poverty should not be the reason they are detained.

Mental health evaluations must lead to actual treatment. We need treatment beds, adequately staffed jails and prisons, and rehabilitation that reduces repeat offenses. Imposing new obligations without funding them pushes costs onto counties and property taxpayers. Only if we fund these things can we make public safety real and not just a political talking point.

I oppose resuming executions under our present system. Our criminal justice system is administered by human beings and is therefore capable of serious error. Capital punishment is irreversible, and yet we know there have been wrongful convictions, racial disparities, unequal access to effective counsel, and inconsistent charging and sentencing. We should not pretend that the alternative is a lack of meaningful punishment. Life imprisonment without the possibility of parole is an extremely serious sanction that protects the public and ensures accountability.”

12. Tech companies are investing heavily in North Carolina data centers, bringing tax revenue but also consuming significant electricity and water resources. How should the state balance data center investment with environmental protection and community concerns?

Unlike how so many policies are done today in the General Assembly, our approach to regulating data centers should be open, transparent, and welcoming to public feedback. As a starting place for those conversations, let me offer three core principles:

The first is local control. Communities should be able to prohibit large data centers if they choose, and state law should explicitly protect that authority.

The second is strict minimum standards. Where communities approve large data centers, we need statewide standards requiring companies to mitigate electricity and water demands, along with air, water, and noise pollution. Companies must pay the costs their facilities impose on utilities and infrastructure. Families and small businesses should not subsidize those costs through their utility bills.

The third is fiscal responsibility. I oppose taxpayer subsidies for data centers. Instead, the state should give local communities maximum flexibility to impose higher tax rates on these facilities if they choose.

If a community agrees to host a major data center, its residents should receive a meaningful public benefit from that decision. And if the community chooses not to host a major data center, then so be it.

13. Give an example of an opinion, policy, vote or action you changed based on constituent feedback. If you have not yet held elected office, describe a time when you changed your position on an issue after listening to those affected by it.

“I’ve learned so much from constituents and experts in this job, including about problems I hadn’t understood the scope of. One example is “colorimetric field drug tests”—little packets police officers use to test suspected drugs on the roadside, with color changes indicating different substances.

A constituent researcher brought me evidence that these tests can mistake legal substances for illegal drugs. Research identifies them as one of the largest known contributors to wrongful arrests and convictions in the country. The consequences are horrifying: innocent people can spend weeks or months in jail, lose their jobs or homes, and even plead guilty just to get released sooner.

Learning about this led me to work with experts and Republican colleagues on authoring the bipartisan Equipping Law Enforcement for Better Drug Detection bill (HB 1186). It would fund a $1.75 million pilot program providing participating agencies with new testing technology to replace color-based tests. The amazing part about it is that it can improve not only accuracy but officer safety and the effectiveness of drug investigations. Every minute spent with a false positive field test is time an officer could be pursuing a true positive, and we owe law enforcement officers tools that send them in the right direction, not the wrong one.

That constituent conversation changed my legislative priorities and led directly to a concrete proposal. It’s an example of why listening matters even in an area where I already brought substantial professional experience.”

14. Are there any issues this questionnaire has not addressed that you would like to address?

I’m a father of two young girls, and I want North Carolina to thrive for them, and for you, and for your kids and grandkids.

I want constituents to know that they don’t have to agree with me on everything to have my attention and my help. Representing this district means listening carefully and taking people’s concerns seriously. I’m grateful for the opportunity to serve, and I want people to feel that their government belongs to them—and that they have someone working for them in Raleigh. I mean what I say about restoring democracy in North Carolina. That means holding every politician accountable for being responsive and open-minded—including me. That’s a good thing!