Name as it appears on the ballot: Joe John
Phone number: (919) 602-4215
Email: joejohnnchouse40@gmail.com
Years lived in the district: 26
1. What do you think are the three biggest issues facing our state? If you are an incumbent, what have you done to address those issues, and what more would you do if given another term? If you are a challenger, what would you do differently to address those issues than the incumbent has done?
First, eliminating gerrymandering by creating a truly independent, impartial, non-partisan redistricting commission for NC legislative and congressional districts. NC voters must select their representatives rather than politicians selecting their voters as happens now. The first bill I introduced as a NC House Representative established such a commission. Although that bill died in committee, a similar bill will be the first I introduce and work to pass when I return to the General Assembly in January. As long as I am a NC legislator, I will continue to reintroduce it until we achieve passage.
Second, defending and restoring the status of North Carolina’s judiciary as a constitutionally established, separate and independent branch of government against the ongoing, what I have come to call, “War on an Independent Judiciary.” I have opposed on the House floor measure after measure seeking to make the judicial branch subject to the legislature. Bills requiring partisan elections at both the trial and appellate levels, after 15-20 years of non-partisan selection, are to me the most egregious. The concepts of being fair, impartial and independent, what all expect of a judge, are wholly inconsistent with that of being partisan. Moreover, there seems to be an unspoken expectation that “our” judges will rule “our” way, coupled with an express or implied threat of strong, future electoral opposition by members of an incumbent judge’s own political party in the event of an unfavorable ruling–in other words follow the party line or else. The second bill I will introduce upon returning to the General Assembly will be to restore non-partisan judicial elections at all levels.
Third, establishing and maintaining a strong educational system from bottom to top, from the beginning years to the community college and university levels. This is absolutely essential, not only to allow all North Carolina children to develop their natural abilities to the fullest, but also to promote and support a robust economic and business climate in our state. Studies have shown that the emerging job market in North Carolina will require post-high school training and skills. As the father of three children educated in North Carolina schools and the grandfather of children at different stages of the process, I believe we must maintain a high-quality connected educational system in which all North Carolina’s children will be prepared for the jobs of the future. As a legislator I have advocated, and will continue to advocate, for the resources to maintain such a system.
2. It seems hardly a day goes by without news of another mass shooting. On the state level, what changes to gun laws, if any, do you support? If you do not support any changes, please explain why you think the current laws are successful.
In the past session of the General Assembly, I co-sponsored HB 976, Extreme Risk Protection Orders. After nearly every mass shooting, witnesses inevitably come forward who were aware the individual involved was at risk for serious violence and had access to a weapon. However, these individuals either did nothing or felt they were unable to take any action. HB 976 provided an opportunity to take such matters before a judge who could decide, following a hearing, whether to direct law enforcement to seize for a limited period of time any weapons accessible to the individual. This type of procedure would give some opportunity for relatives, classmates and law enforcement to act before a tragedy occurs. The bill died in committee, but merits further consideration in the next session. I also favor universal background checks.
3. In recent years, Duke Energy’s coal ash spilled into the Dan River and Chemours’s Gen-X leaked into the Cape Fear River. Do you think these companies have been held sufficiently accountable? Do you believe the state has put in place sufficient regulations to prevent these problems from occurring again? If not, what more do you propose doing?
Clean drinking water is essential. Yet, despite these incidents, the supermajority in the General Assembly has consistently acted to limit our state’s ability to protect against contamination. 2013 legislation prohibited local governments, directly answerable to local citizens, from enacting community environmental regulations and also eliminated passage of any state and local regulations stronger than federal regulations. The previous Department of Environment and Natural Resources was dismantled, and what remained was denominated the Department of Environmental Quality. Although additional regulations may not be necessary, the number of DEQ positions has been cut (including in 2018 3.28 positions in the Coal Ash Management Program) and specific instrumentation requests have been denied, limiting its ability to perform its enforcement function. Yet, ever increasing funding has been sent to the NC Collaboratory which has no statutory enforcement capability. Neither Duke Energy nor Chemours have been held sufficiently accountable. 2016 legislation allows Duke to proceed with “cap in place” methods instead of full excavation and closing of unlined coal ash ponds. Duke also has been permitted to assess its customers to help with clean up costs, and this year’s budget contained a provision limiting testing for emerging contaminants to the class of chemicals that includes Gen-X, thereby limiting the potential future responsibility of Chemours holding Chemours to the already discovered Gen-X.
4. In the wake of Hurricane Florence, at least six hog-farm lagoons were damaged and more than fifty saw discharges or were inundated with floodwaters as of this writing, according to the DEQ. More than five thousand hogs have died, and right now it’s unclear what the ultimate long-term environmental impacts will be. Since Hurricane Floyd, environmentalists have warned that, in a severe flooding event, the farms’ “anachronistic” waste-disposal techniques could pose a threat to the state’s waterways and public health, while the industry has insisted that its farms utilize best practices and are already heavily regulated. Do you believe these farms, and their lagoons, pose a risk to the environment? If so, do you believe the state has done enough to minimize that risk?
North Carolina is home to nine million hogs and is the nation’s second-largest pork producer. In 1997, the General Assembly passed a moratorium on construction of new hog lagoons; however, the moratorium only halted new construction; it did not address relocation or remediation of existing facilities, which were “grandfathered” from being affected. In this regard, essentially nothing has changed since 1997. Large numbers of lagoons, basically open-air storage and spray operations, remain in the 100-year floodplains of eastern North Carolina. The devastating effects of Hurricane Floyd failed to generate action. Now, the Chinese corporation WH Group, which owns Smithfield Farms and has contracts with nearly all local hog farmers, has (as noted in the next question) received three multi-million-dollar verdicts and employs high-priced lobbyists and expensive lawyers, and Hurricane Florence has wreaked its havoc throughout southeastern North Carolina. Modern technology is being studied at the NCSU Animal and Poultry Waste Management Center, and Smithfield has modernized operations in some other states. It is time to take a strong, hard legislative look at this issue.
5. This year, Smithfield Foods—the world’s largest pork producer—has lost three verdicts in North Carolina totaling millions of dollars, after juries found that its farms’ methods of waste disposal infringed on the property rights of their neighbors. But in the last two years, the General Assembly has taken steps to make it more difficult for these neighbors to sue or to recover substantial damages, citing the threats these lawsuits pose to the well-being of family farmers. Do you believe the legislature’s actions with regard to these nuisance lawsuits are prudent? Why or why not?
No. I voted against H 467, the most recent legislation seeking to curtail nuisance suits. Although the bill ultimately passed, we were successful in passing an amendment which prevented the bill from applying to lawsuits already filed and pending—a provision included by the bill sponsors. I believe the bill itself, which cuts off property rights protected by the common law years before North Carolina became a state, may well be unconstitutional even without this provision. It essentially takes away from NC citizens the right to access the courts for damages resulting from harm to their right to enjoy their homes, in this case alleged to have been caused by odors and other impacts emanating from hog farms.
6. It has been estimated that special sessions of the North Carolina legislature cost about $50,000 per day. Since 2016, the General Assembly has called seven of them to deal with everything from passing HB 2—the so-called bathroom bill—to passing restrictions on the governor’s powers after Roy Cooper defeated Pat McCrory to, most recently, clean up controversial constitutional amendment language so that it complied with a court order. Under what circumstances do you think it’s appropriate to hold a special session?
The NC Constitution authorizes a special session of the General Assembly upon written request by 3/5ths of its members, both House and Senate. The Constitution drafters apparently did not anticipate that 3/5ths of the General Assembly would convene extra legislative sessions at taxpayer expense for frivolous reasons or to accomplish matters which could or should have been resolved during the legislature’s regular session. Among those which have occurred since 2016, the sessions called to provide emergency relief to victims of Hurricane Matthew and severe forest fires and the most recent to initiate the aid process for citizens, schools and communities affected by Hurricane Florence seem to me to have both necessary and appropriate.
7. What are your thoughts on the six proposed constitutional amendments before voters this November? Please explain which you support and which you don’t support and why. What do you think about the process behind these amendments—what critics have described as a limited public debate, for example, as well as the elimination of amendment numbers and ballot summaries, and the lack of so-called implementing legislation, which could be passed in another special session after the November vote?
To be answered fully, this question requires an extremely detailed response which cannot be included here. However, in summary, five of these six amendments are infected by the same “rush to judgment” process regarding the budget described in question 15. As noted in the question, nearly all amendments were drafted behind closed doors, presented on short notice, considered with only very limited debate, and directed to be placed on the ballot without numbers, but with deceptive descriptions. The most troubling concern about all the amendments is, as the question suggests, the lack of enabling legislation. What that means is that the bill which placed the amendment on the ballot contained no direction as to how it should be implemented, leaving that for another day, presumably the already scheduled Nov. 27, 2018, session. With reference to the so-called Photo ID amendment, for example, no one at this point (and particularly not before the election) can state with certainty what type of ID will satisfy the amendment, be it Real ID, NC Driver’s License, school identification card, military id, etc. In regard to the Right to Hunt and Fish amendment, again no one at this point can state with certainty what is encompassed with this “Right,” be it a 24/7 permissiveness, or never on Sunday, or with or without a license (issued by what entity), or if this “Right” trumps all property rights, etc. As to these amendments, if passed by the voters, the General Assembly will have been issued a “blank check” to fill in the blanks at its whim and sole discretion after the fact, but with the imprimatur of the Constitution of the State of North Carolina. The two “power grab” amendments dealing with judicial selection and composition of the Board of Elections are opposed by all five living former North Carolina Governors and by all six former North Carolina Supreme Court Chief Justices. These two amendments are consistent with continuing attempts by the General Assembly super majority to concentrate all matters and all authority within the legislative branch contrary to the separation of powers provisions in both the North Carolina and US Constitutions. Finally, full disclosure, I voted for the Victims’ Rights amendment, otherwise known as Marcy’s Law, based upon my observations as a Judge over the years regarding how victims of crime, who are truly “innocent,” often are treated poorly by the court system. Concededly, crime victims already have specific protections within the NC Constitution, and the argument can fairly be made that these new protections, which some feel impinge upon the rights of criminal defendants, should more appropriately have been proposed as legislation rather than in the form of a constitutional amendment.
8. In May, thousands of teachers from all over the state marched on the legislature to demand better pay, more resources for students, and more respect. Do you think North Carolina’s schools are being adequately funded? If not, what taxes would you be willing to raise—or what services would you be willing to cut—to fund them better?
Every one of the teachers I spoke with this past May focused their comments and attention upon issues affecting students, classrooms and facilities. None indicated that the teacher march implicated a demand for better pay. That being said, North Carolina teacher pay is woefully low compared to the national average; reaching that goal would help keep our best teachers here in North Carolina rather than seeing them leave for neighboring states like Georgia and Tennessee. The super majority’s most recent budget contained no funding to address the “class size chaos” issue created by legislative mandates on class sizes for lower grades that simply shifted the cost onto local school districts. In addition, the budget denied all teachers even a modest $150 stipend for sums spent on school supplies, failed to eliminate the Pre-K waiting list, and rejected inclusion of a school construction bond, especially critical for rural areas. I note these items were all addressed by the Governor’s proposed budget and funded by a moratorium on projected tax reductions for certain corporations and for individuals earning more then $200,000 annually and not by increasing taxes or cutting services.
9. Currently, twenty-nine states have minimum wages above the federal minimum. North Carolina is not among them. Do you believe North Carolina should raise its minimum wage?
One size does not fit all among the economies of North Carolina’s widely disparate counties. I favor giving local governments the authority to set minimum wages within their jurisdictions.
10. Under current law, toward the end of 2020, municipalities will gain the authority to pass nondiscrimination and living wage ordinances—unless the General Assembly intervenes. Since the winner of your race will be in office at that time, do you believe local governments in North Carolina should be allowed to make these decisions for themselves?
Yes. It is curious that the current General Assembly supermajority (which touts itself the party of “smaller” government), has interjected itself with such regularity into the operation of local governments. For example, it created new Board of Education and County Commissioner districts in Raleigh, new City Council districts in Asheville and Greensboro, and changed many local elections from non-partisan to partisan. It has also interjected itself into the operation of the City of Asheville water system and the Charlotte Douglas international airport, meddled in the City of Raleigh decisions about its Dorothea Dix property, prohibited local governments from enacting their own environmental regulations, and even reviewed City Council districts in the small community of Trinity. Notwithstanding that North Carolina is generally a Dillon’s Rule state, meaning local government authority is derived from the legislature, all these matters–as well as that to which the question is directed–appear more appropriately determined by local government officials who live and work in the communities they govern.
11. Over the last couple of years in Wake County, county commissioners and school board members have battled over local school funding. Recently, some commissioners have made moves to petition the legislature to allow for a pilot program in which the Board of Commissioners turns over school-taxing authority to the Board of Education, as is the arrangement in most states. In general, do you believe the state’s elected school boards should have the responsibility to raise taxes for the schools they oversee? Why or why not?
Candidly, this is a complex issue which, should it come before the General Assembly, will require significant further study and consideration on my part. I would want to review the experience of other states and receive input from members of the Wake County Board of Commissioners and the Wake County School Board as well as other interested individuals.
12. Since Governor Cooper’s election, the legislature has taken a number of steps to assume powers that were previously the executive’s domain, including overhauling the State Board of Elections. Do you believe these decisions were merely power grabs, as Democrats have alleged, or that they were made in the interests of public policy?
Sadly, I must agree that these efforts were primarily power grabs. As evidenced by these actions and the multiplicity of bills affecting the independence of North Carolina’s judicial branch, there appears to be a philosophy among the current supermajority of legislative ascendancy in all matters. This flies in the face of the creation of three separate and independent branches of government in both the federal and North Carolina Constitutions and the clearly delineated separation of powers among the branches in both of those documents.
13. Over the last year, the state has frequently found itself in court over its legislative and congressional districts, which courts have ruled to be unconstitutional racial and partisan gerrymanders. Given this, do you believe the state legislature of that last several years has acted as a legitimate body? If not, what do you propose as a solution? If yes, please tell us why.
As noted in my response to question # 1, I believe the General Assembly must move to eliminate gerrymandering by placing on the ballot a constitutional amendment creating a truly independent, impartial, non-partisan redistricting commission for NC legislative and congressional districts. NC voters must select their representatives rather than politicians selecting their voters as happens now.
14. Give an example of a time, during your political career, when you have changed your position as a result of a discussion with someone who held an opposing view.
During the bulk of my professional career, while serving as a Judge, arbitrator and certified Superior Court Mediator, my role was either to reach a judicial or arbitration decision based upon consideration of the opposing views presented or to conciliate the opposing views of the parties to a mediation. Particularly as a judge and arbitrator, I have found my initial impression changed as a result of considering and weighing the evidence and argument presented.
15. Identify and explain one principled stand you would be willing to take if elected that you suspect might cost you some points with voters.
I would like to address a stand that I have recently taken. In this year’s legislative Short Session, the supermajority leadership rigged the budget process in an unprecedented manner. The 400+ page budget was crafted by a small handful of individuals (roughly five legislators and staff), then an unrelated bill was stripped of its original language and replaced with the secretly drafted budget. This resulted in the creation of what is known as a conference report, which precludes any amendments whatsoever (such as the school safety one I tried to offer requiring all NC 911-call centers to accept text messages), chokes debate and then is literally rammed through on an up or down, “yes” or “no,” all or nothing vote.
In sum, for the first time in our state’s history, the budget for the entire state of North Carolina was literally crafted by five individuals with absolutely no modifications, not even a single comma, permitted. Moreover, most legislators did not even receive the 400+ page budget until just a few hours before we were asked to vote on it. With reference to this voluminous budget, which both contained certain measures which merited support in whole or in part, and either by omission or inclusion dealt with many other measures which raised concerns, the primary basis for my “No” vote was the lack of time to fully analyze the contents and the preclusion of any changes.
I anticipated at the time that this would generate some negative campaign material, and even wrote a Facebook post at the time that read: “So much for transparency and a full, free debate. But great for those negative ads about how Representative X voted (“for”) (“against”) [insert budget provision like “school funding”] because Representative X (did) (did not) vote for the budget as a whole.” And, yes, I anticipated correctly. My vote against rigging the process has led to negative political advertising against me in the current election which may cost me some points with voters who have not heard “the rest of the story.”
