[link removed]
Good evening,

We recently published a new report ([link removed]) that outlines how an activist bureaucracy is holding North Carolina’s energy future hostage, and what can be done to fix this problem.

NC’s Carbon Plan law requires a 70% reduction in carbon emissions (compared to 2005 levels) by 2030, and net-carbon emissions by 2050. However, the law also mandates the “least cost path”, which maintains or increases grid reliability.

Meeting these twin goals of (1) net-zero carbon emissions and (2) grid reliability would realistically require either more low-emission natural gas or zero-emission nuclear power, the only resources capable of maintaining baseload power for the electrical grid.

Since building new nuclear power plants takes a long time, natural gas should, at minimum, act as a bridge to zero-emission nuclear under the current Carbon Plan law, or be used as a baseload power resource if the law is amended or repealed.

Unfortunately, natural gas faces political opposition from environmental activists, the renewable energy lobby, and the politicians they support. This has resulted in the executive branch taking advantage of gaps in the law to stymie natural gas pipelines and power plants.

Consequently, North Carolina is served by only one natural gas pipeline.

In that case, what can North Carolina do to help energy consumers?

Locke’s new report outlines several options, including:
* Repeal the Carbon Plan, or at least its interim 2030 goal
* Pass an “Only Pay for What You Get” Act
* Forbid overly vague permitting criteria, like “environmental justice”
* Maintain vigilance over successful reforms
* Urge Congress to pass permitting reform

You can read more about energy here ([link removed]) , here ([link removed]) , and here ([link removed]) .

Esse quam videri,

Donald Bryson

[link removed]

[link removed]

Read the Report ([link removed])
Read the One Pager ([link removed])
More from Locke
1) 🏛️🏛️🏛️ What’s in the NC Senate’s 2025–27 budget proposal? ([link removed])
* Last week, the state Senate unveiled its 2025-2027 budget proposal
+ They recommended $32.6 billion in net General Fund appropriations for FY 2026
+ Total spending would rise to $71.7 billion, a 5.7% increase from last year, and 62.1% higher than FY 2019!
* While Governor Stein’s budget suggested halting reductions to personal and corporate income tax rates, the Senate proposal would remain committed to lowering taxes
+ The plan maintains the elimination of the corporate income tax by 2030
+ And personal income tax cuts would accelerate, potentially reaching 1.99% by 2029
o By contrast, Stein’s budget would raise taxes by $1.35 billion in FY 2027 and $4.1 billion in FY 2030
* The proposal includes major investments in reserves and disaster recovery, while scaling back NCInnovation’s controversial funding model
+ $1 billion would restore the Savings Reserve to its pre-Hurricane Helene balance of $4.75 billion, and $700 million would go to a new Helene Disaster Recovery Fund, pulled from multiple reserve accounts
+ NCInnovation’s $500 million endowment would be broken up, with $400 million redistributed to a new NC children’s hospital and $100 million to the State Treasury
o Future NCInnovation funding would be limited to $25 million annually for four years
* Education and health care get moderate boosts, but fall short of the governor’s more aggressive proposals
+ Teachers would receive average raises of 2.3% in FY 2026 and 3.3% over the biennium, plus $3,000 in bonuses and $36.3 million in extra pay for teachers in advanced roles
+ The budget includes $1.6 billion for Medicaid, with new work requirements, pending federal approval
+ Certificate of Need (CON) laws would be repealed to increase health care access and lower costs
* The Senate includes several policy shifts and spending changes that reflect fiscal restraint and pro-growth priorities
+ The “70% reduction in carbon emissions by 2030” mandate would be scrapped to save consumers an estimated $13 billion
+ Sports wagering operators would face a tax hike from 18% to 36%
+ $250 million would aid farmers with verified 2024 crop losses
* In conclusion, the Senate’s budget proposal wisely limits growth in net General Fund appropriations; however, policymakers should practice caution about the increase in total expenditures, which the federal government heavily funds

Read the full article here ([link removed]) .

2) 🚜🚜🚜 Tariff crossfire threatens NC farms again ([link removed])
* With a trade war looming, North Carolina’s farmers are once again bracing for impact
+ Trump’s proposed tariffs on Chinese imports mirror the 2018–19 conflict that led to billions in bailout payments for struggling North Carolina farmers
* North Carolina’s agriculture industry depends heavily on exports, and the risk of disruption is massive
+ In 2023, NC exported nearly $800M in pork and $668M in tobacco
o China, Canada, Mexico, South Korea, and Japan are not just customers, they’re essential to rural livelihoods
o China, a particularly significant buyer, could once again slam the door shut overnight
+ When trade routes close, it’s not just goods that stop moving, but also paychecks, investments, and growth
+ More than 20% of U.S. farm income is export-driven
+ Bailouts may return, but farmers say they can’t replace stable, long-term market access
* The American Farm Bureau has warned that the proposed tariffs would hammer farms on both ends, raising costs and cutting off revenue
+ Tariffs would spike prices for inputs like fertilizer and equipment
+ While retaliatory tariffs would make American-grown goods less competitive abroad
+ Small-to-medium-sized farms, in particular, would be hurt
* North Carolina farmers need consistent access to international markets for both inputs and exports, and a political environment that doesn’t treat them like bargaining chips
+ Because when trade wars are waged from Washington, it’s not politicians who bear the cost — it’s farmers in North Carolina and elsewhere

You can read more here ([link removed]) .

3) ⚖️⚖️⚖️ Griffin’s election challenge hangs by a legal thread ([link removed])
* With state appeals exhausted, Judge Griffin’s case is now in federal court, but the clock (and math) aren’t on his side
+ Judge Richard Myers is expected to rule by month’s end, but even if all 1,654 disputed ballots are tossed, Griffin would still need an improbable 72.2% of them to flip the race
+ Most of the challenged ballots are from Democrats and unaffiliated voters, many in left-leaning Guilford County, making that kind of vote margin a statistical long shot
* The State Board of Elections is interpreting court orders narrowly, but is still trying to play moral referee
+ The State Board of Elections limited the impact of Griffin’s challenge to only the voters named in his original protest, rejecting his attempt to add thousands more during the court battle
+ But in a twist, the Board allowed “Never Resident” voters to defend their eligibility, a move that arguably violates the Court of Appeals’ strict order and could land the Board in legal trouble
* Consequently, this case opens the floodgates for post-election chaos and inconsistent rule application
+ The vague appellate ruling skipped normal evidentiary hearings, leaving the Board and courts to improvise a process that could disenfranchise legitimate voters or reward procedural gamesmanship
+ In either case, the issues raised by this case highlight why the court should not have applied these rule changes retrospectively

You can read the full report here ([link removed]) .


Donate ([link removed])

============================================================
** Facebook ([link removed])
** Twitter ([link removed])
** Link ([link removed])
** LinkedIn ([link removed])
Want to change how you receive these emails?
You can ** update your preferences ([link removed])
or ** unsubscribe from this list ([link removed])
.