What's Really in North Carolina's New State Budget?

 Ashley Vaughan and Joseph Backholm unpack North Carolina's newly signed state budget and explore what it reveals about the state's priorities. From funding pregnancy resource centers and teacher pay raises to tax cuts, AI in education, religious instruction, and parental rights in schools, they examine some of the budget's biggest highlights through a biblical lens. Along the way, they discuss what makes for wise government spending, where Christians can reasonably disagree, and why budgets are ultimately moral documents that reflect what a society values. 

Transcript

SPEAKER_01 0:00

Welcome to Politics for Happy People. So glad that you are with us today. This is the place where we have fun conversations about serious topics. And today the serious topic we're going to discuss, among other things, is the North Carolina State budget drumroll. It has arrived. Ashley, how excited are you?

SPEAKER_00 0:21

I've been waiting on baited breath for this day.

SPEAKER_01 0:24

Having you, it's like Christmas. It's like Christmas. And actually, when you hang around the legislature for a while and do any kind of lobbying work down there, it is kind of lobbyist Christmas. It's kind of funny because you basically you work all year to figure out what's going to be in there, and some people get coal and some people get exactly what they wanted, and people's moods are dramatically affected by that. And so we're going to talk about some of the stuff that's in there today. So, what do you got?

SPEAKER_00 0:52

Well, uh, in looking over the budget, there are a couple things that stood out to me. And the first one is the continuation of funding for pregnancy resource centers. And this is something that uh has been done for a while now in North Carolina, and it goes basically to there are two different sort of groups that this funding goes through to. One is Human Coalition and one is Carolina Pregnancy Care Fellowship. And all together, it looks like we have about seven million dollars going to funding these pregnancy resource centers. And these are pro-life groups that are providing support and assistance to mothers, uh, most of which who have unplanned pregnancies, but I think any woman could go there and get support. So things like diapers, um, parenting classes, uh education and support for health challenges that they are having having. Um, they can get ultrasounds. It's a wonderful way to support women uh in that time. And they really they they care for women during pregnancy. They also uh continue that relationship on with the parenting classes after the baby is born. They help them under they help women understand what their options are that uh will be protecting life, uh such as adoption. And um, it's a wonderful resource for our women in North Carolina, and we're very happy that they're that we are continuing to value life in our state by supporting these uh pregnancy centers.

SPEAKER_01 2:46

These are kind of the anti-Planned Parenthood organizations, and Planned Parenthood, rightly, in my opinion, takes a lot of heat because they they claim to be about women's health, and really for the most part, when you come in pregnant, they have one option for you. And if you don't want to get an abortion, they'll let you leave in most cases, I believe. Um, but they're not there to offer material support to encourage you emotionally or practically in the steps toward actually being a mother, being a parent. That's what these pregnancy centers do. Uh they are unambiguously, and they should be pro-life, um, but they are really kind of the counterbalance to a movement that that pushes a lot of people uh and incentivizes uh abortion, that choice for a lot of young women. And so it is wonderful to know that there is a network of these pregnancy centers, and I'm gonna assume most of our audience is aware that they are out there, um, but it is uh I think right and good and appropriate of the North Carolina uh legislatures to to support that option because it it is unambiguously the right choice we want to provide resources so they can make that.

SPEAKER_00 3:55

Another thing that these centers do that I didn't mention, they provide post-abortion counseling. And a lot of times women will come to these centers after they've had an abortion because they can't go back to the center where they had the abortion emotionally. They just they cannot return. And so they'll get their, you know, their post-visit at these pregnancy centers, or they'll just come there, you know, maybe the next time they're pregnant and they had an abortion the last time. And their counselors are skilled at helping women heal from that spiritually and emotionally, and um, and I love, I just I I love the way um women are supported in this environment.

SPEAKER_01 4:40

Yeah, you know, Ashley, you mentioned there that women just can't go back to the place where they got their abortion. I also think it's true that the place where they got their abortion does not want them to come back. Planned Parenthood is not eager to comfort and help and assist emotionally the women who were just in there for an abortion. Uh the premise, uh a primary premise of the entire movement and the entire argument is that there is no harm, that there is no cost, that this is going to be good for you and make you happy. So they are not in a position where they are going to simply um, you know, give you a hug, talk you through it, help you come to forgiveness of yourself and you know, and from God and all of that. That's just not who they are. So, yes, it's true, I think, that many women do not want to go back to that place after making that decision because it's um it's traumatic. But those places are not wanting them to come back. They don't offer the services anywhere. So there really is this space in the culture where where do women go when they have uh done something that they deeply regret to receive healing and help, and and that's part of what these these organizations do. But of course, primarily they're trying to uh avoid that decision in the first place. Yeah. Now actually, this actually brings up one question, and I think I may have gotten my ahead of myself in in in the conversation because we're talking about what the right things for government to be funding is right now, and and this is one of the things that budget. But I think it's it it'd be helpful before we go through the rest of the you know things in the budget that caught our attention to think about whether there is a is there such a thing as a biblical budget? Is there a a a Christian or biblical way to think about something kind of academic and nerdy like a state budget for those of us who are not accountants, right? Just the word budget just kind of makes us a little bit sleepy. But is there a biblical way of thinking about this in your mind?

SPEAKER_00 6:42

Absolutely. I mean, I think of just more broadly the role of government in promoting good. And so we want to make sure that the money that we are going, that we are spending is going towards things that are good. And we also, I think, want to be responsible with our money. We don't want to waste it, right? We have to be good stewards of resources. So when I think of a biblical budget, I think those are the two things that I think. We want to fund things and incentivize things that are good, and we also want to be thrifty and responsible.

SPEAKER_01 7:14

Yeah. Well, that's good. And and the principle that you just referred to there of, you know, funding things that are good, I think is is half of what uh Paul talks about in Romans chapter 13, where he describes that God's design for government is to reward good and to punish evil. And so as we try to do things as a as a community and as a civilization, as a state, that rewards good, it goes without saying what you should not do is reward what is evil and what is counterproductive, right? So that's kind of the balance, I think, at a very high level. Um, and I think certainly we're gonna talk about some of the ways in which I think maybe um people of goodwill and good intention can disagree about whether a particular uh expenditure is good or not in that sense. Um, but yeah, I think that I think that provides a framework, and that's one of the reasons why funding a pregnancy center that's going to encourage women not to get abortions is good. It's also the reason why we would say funding Planned Parenthood, which has been a very long conversation, uh, would be bad because they are out there hoping that women will get an abortion, and because that is an un i it is unambiguously immoral evil, we don't want government funding that. And that's a way to look at that.

SPEAKER_00 8:34

Yeah. I was just reading this week uh in 1 Kings when Solomon became king, he asked God for wisdom to discern between good and evil. And sometimes we do need God to give us wisdom. Sometimes it's obvious, like you said, it is good to uh promote programs that are encouraging life, and it is bad to uh promote or fund programs that are uh about ending life. Um and but there are other areas, as you said, where you you can have a good debate about it. And um so yeah, let's move through this.

SPEAKER_01 9:13

And we're actually gonna get we're gonna get into one of those. And and here's a highlight, uh, a top line number for the budget. Um, this new budget that North Carolina has passed, governor just signed, spends 30 points 34.4 billion dollars. Uh, that's up from 30.9 billion in the last budget. That's three and a half billion or about an 11% increase. So we're spending more. Nobody's surprised by that. We always kind of spend more because the needs are growing. Um, is that too much more? People will debate that. But here's one thing that we spent a lot of money on is teacher pay. And this is something that everybody running for re-election this November who voted for this budget is gonna talk about how they increased pay for teachers. And it especially increases uh starting teacher pay to $53,000, just under $56, just under $54,000 a year. This puts North Carolina at number one in the South in starting teacher pay. And that was kind of a meaningful data point, I think, for our legislators. It also provides a series of bonuses for teachers in addition to these teacher raises. Now, I have um this is one of those issues that for me is is is kind of challenging because we all want our friends and neighbors to have more money. We all value teachers. My wife is an educator, not in the government system, but she's an educator. My sister has been, is not now. My grandmother was a career, you know, kindergarten teacher. We all know and love teachers and we want them to be compensated for it. But the thing I cannot get over is the fact that there is almost there's essentially no connection between how much money you spend on education and how well students do for learning. And we have all sorts of concerning data about whether or not kids are actually learning the things that they're supposed to be learning. Are they reading and doing math at grade level? And those numbers are very discouraging. But we consider it to be an unambiguous moral good to raise the pay rate the the pay of the teachers because we assume, I think, that if we pay them better, the outcomes are going to come for kids. But there's lots of evidence that that is in fact not true. Is that the wrong way for me to be like thinking about this, Ashley?

SPEAKER_00 11:48

I'll admit I am not an expert on this topic. However, I'm very sympathetic to the argument that raising teacher pay will improve education. And the reason that I think that is because I think if teachers are paid well and paid for their professionalism, that it will attract talent to the schools. Because no one wants to go to a job where and teaching is hard work. It really is hard work. You're on your feet all day, you don't have a moment's rest, probably, or much because they're kids and they always need something. Um but it's also you know intellectual because you're you're teaching them. It's not just childcare, and and I do think it's hard work. And so it is hard work. There's no doubt that it's hard work. Again, my children, my children, yeah. Well, my children aren't, my children aren't in public schools, but I very much have a heart for public schools. I want them to be really good. I want them to be strong. Um, I do, I am sympathetic to teacher raises and to paying teachers just because I don't think if we're not paying teachers, I don't see why anyone would enter that line of work because people have to provide for their families. So that's sort of how I think about it. But I know that there are all sorts of complicated things when it comes to, okay, you know, where is the money actually going and all of that. I I I don't know, but I do think teachers should be paid.

SPEAKER_01 13:13

Teachers should be paid. It's just the fact that we we can prove, and we're we don't have the time to go through all of this right now, but you can prove pretty conclusively that paying teachers does not result in better out educational outcomes for kids. Now, that doesn't mean it's the teacher's fault, right? This is not a criticism of teachers. This is kind of a you know a commentary on the system where we we all just applaud that this is happening because we like teachers and uh we we especially like our kids' teacher, probably, and so we want to think of them as being taken care of, right? And so all of that is like warm and fuzzy, I'm happy, right? So we get we we get good vibes from it, but it is a mistake if we assume that because we are quote unquote investing more in education, that means that kids are going to do better educationally. And it just that's just not so. And and the reasons that is not so are very complicated. Most of it starts at home, parents, those environments, things like that. Of course, you want teachers to not be stressed out. But it's just kind of a, you know, to me it's just a thing to know. It's a much more complicated um issue than that. And I think the reason why it gets featured so much is because it messages really well for all the reasons that we've just discussed. A lot of us know teachers and are teachers, and so, yay, let's help the teachers. But um, that's just as good for like the the people who are running on helping the teachers. Uh, it's actually better for the people who are running on let's help the teachers than it is for the students. And that's just that's just the way it is right now.

SPEAKER_00 14:46

But there clearly are challenges with the system that that need to be addressed, though, because as you said, yeah, test scores and all the benchmarks for you know how are our kids doing in schools, what are they learning, they are all none of them are where they need to be. So there are challenges uh that that need to be addressed there.

SPEAKER_01 15:03

And there's important context here, right? Because that a lot has happened in school choice in North Carolina that's been very positive, the opportunity scholarships that now exist, and there is real school choice in the state um now. And I think in one sense, the reason that these um these teacher pay raises were put into this budget, in addition to the fact that inflation has happened and things are just more expensive, so raises you know in that way are are appropriate. This is in some ways a rebuttal to the argument that has been made uh for the last few years that public schools are being defunded because we have created school choice. And so um, I, of course, big proponent of school choice, don't want to ignore the fact that there has been massive progress in the state on that issue in in recent years. But let's just, you know, just know in the back of your mind when everybody's saying, yay, we gave more money to education, we gave more money to education, it might feel good, but does it do good?

SPEAKER_00 16:00

Um maybe.

SPEAKER_01 16:03

That's kind of where we're we'll see. Yeah. What do you got next, Ashley?

SPEAKER_00 16:07

Well, it's also in education. So we put five million dollars towards the use of AI education tools. So contracts with companies like Con Migo and Magic School. And these programs are meant to support teachers with lesson plan development and to support students with lesson comprehension. So they do two different things. And it also, the budget also has language that requires the Department of Public A Public Instruction to adopt standards for teaching artificial intelligence and to draft an AI, a model AI policy for school boards. Um, so they're they're asking the Department of Public Instruction to kind of set up some parameters and best practices for how AI is going to be used in schools so that it can be used ethically and and safely and responsibly and all that, which of course is a completely new frontier for everyone. How do we incorporate AI into education? It's here to stay, it's not going away. How do we help the kids use it responsibly and not get stupider?

SPEAKER_01 17:22

Well, and and that that is the challenge of of AI in education is can you can you just never use your brain anymore and still get results and uh a academically and the uh there are not clear rules that come from the legislature, it's basically just a tip of the cap to the issue and the fact that this is a challenge. We have to confront OSPI, I mean the uh the the superintendent of uh education. The um they have to tackle this issue in a way that the legislature could not because they have more time to invest in this, and uh and that's kind of the legislature's way of delegating this task, but recognizing this is something that has to be dealt with, we have to provide some guidance to the schools. Um because it's it's not just hey, let's make sure kids aren't cheating. That's part of it. Um, but it there's also all of the stuff. I mean, you talk about you know, porn in education in in schools and school libraries and all of those things, right? With with the advances of these new technologies, there's all sorts of ways for kids to get hurt with these chatbots to the extent that what extent, if any, will they be used in school we've talked about that before, yeah. That that's right. There's a ton of stuff here, and and there is direction now to you know begin the process of wrapping our minds around this and and creating some rules.

SPEAKER_00 18:43

Well, you mentioned not cheating. It's kind of like what is cheating anymore? Like, you know, how much are we allowed to use AI to assist our thinking? And what is plagiarism? Well, you know, I mean how much thing. Yeah.

SPEAKER_01 18:58

And I feel like an old fuddy duddy because it's it's like the arguments that that my parents were making about calculators. You know, you shouldn't use calculator, you should be able to do that in your head, or at least on a piece of paper, right? Don't use those tools, it makes you dumber. And they might have been right. But calculators are everywhere, easily accessible, produces the right results. Is it cheating? Is it lazy to use a calculator? I mean, at one point I was being told it was. I no longer think that.

SPEAKER_00 19:30

Well, you're you you really like AI. I mean, you use it a lot. You've adopted into your work. So you're not opposed to it, but I think it's hard. I think it is we have to be and we've talked about this before, but as with social media, we have to be careful with the kids, right? Because we didn't grow up with AI. We learned how to think, we learned how to write, we learned how to do all of our own research. Now we can use AI as a tool to help us and make us faster, but we want kids to learn all of that stuff as well. That's right. And so how do we I think it's I'm really glad that they're asking the Department of Public Instruction to put some thought into this.

SPEAKER_01 20:06

Agreed. My next thing that caught my attention in the budget, this is kind of good for everybody. There is an income tax reduction. There is the the new rate, it's going from about four point four percent, three point nine nine, down to three point four nine percent in twenty seven to twenty nine in those years, and all the way down to eventually two point nine nine percent for the twenty thirty three to twenty thirty foyennium. So there are gradual reductions in the income tax rate, and um it could actually go lower than that in this new budget after 2034 if uh revenue triggers are met, which means if if the state is proving that they are bringing in a certain amount of revenue through other sources other than the income tax, then they will continue to reduce the income tax rate. But that results in ultimately like a 25% reduction in the state income tax between now and 2033, and you know, all God's people say amen. So who doesn't like that, right? So I'm excited about it as a taxpayer. That's right. So yeah, I mean, so the the budget has grown, but the income tax rate is is is going down, uh, and that means clearly that the economy is growing and and and when there's more activity, they're they're raising uh state revenues uh in other ways. So that makes me happy.

SPEAKER_00 21:37

Yeah.

unknown 21:38

Yeah.

SPEAKER_01 21:38

Any other things? Yeah. What do you got next, actually?

SPEAKER_00 21:44

So the next one that I have is released time for religious instruction. So the Supreme Court set a precedent that requires students to be able to leave school for religious instruction. Religious instruction, but it doesn't weigh in on whether that would be an excused or an unexcused absence. And the policy surrounding this up until this point has been up to school boards. But the state has said that students can have release time to uh have religious instruction, and it doesn't obviously specify which type, so it could be any. Uh, but the three qualifications are it has to be off school property, it has to be privately funded, and the parents have to give permission. But if all those three things are in place, then the students can leave campus for uh one to four hours a day, I believe it is, and have religious instruction. So this is great because there are uh programs like LifeWise, which is kind of rapidly expanding across the country, um, and they're partnering with churches, and students are able, if the parents agree, students are able to opt into this program and they can leave school for a couple hours a day to get really good Bible instruction through this program, LifeWise, that's partnering with local churches around the country and our state. Yes.

SPEAKER_01 23:16

Is there does it specify how often you can get an excused absence for this?

SPEAKER_00 23:24

Um at least an hour, but no more than four hours of excused absence per week.

SPEAKER_01 23:31

No more than four per week, because that's a lot. And the state is required. Okay. I mean, yeah, and and you talk about life-wise, and it it is it is a great program. There's been so much, you know, cultural kind of wrestling around this idea of religious instruction that happens in school. You have a Bible club on campus, and is that a violation of separation in the church and state? And it's not. Um, but these programs, which would then be kind of adjacent, and here's kind of a ministry opportunity for people to know if you have a church near a school, is that you can run a Bible, you can run a Bible study out of your church near the school, and the law requires, providing mom and dad are supportive, there's those students to be uh given excused absences to participate in that. Um is a it's a it's a way of recognizing that the state is not the one to do the religious instruction. And frankly, at this point, uh based on what I know about a lot of the teachers, I basically agree with that. But the instruction can happen adjacent, nearby, in cooperation with the parents, and and the school cannot get in the way of that. And and I know one of the challenges that that this is trying to prevent is students actually being um punished in some way, sometimes small, sometimes just socially, uh, for participating in things off campus. And so I think this is a great step for just kind of plurality and and the uh religious expression that we all value.

SPEAKER_00 25:09

It's an option, right? It's an option that families have. You don't have to do it, but you can. It's sort of in the same spirit of school choice. If families want to take advantage of these programs, they can. I think it's wonderful. Right.

SPEAKER_01 25:24

My third turn. Yes, my third thing here that has caught my attention, and this is kind of like it's a little bit like the income tax deduction. This has to do with gambling deductions, gambling loss deductions. And Ashley, I know you are not a degenerate gambler, and so this is an issue that is not going to probably be personal to you. But you might not be surprised to know that people who gamble lose money when they gamble, and they lose money very often, right? And that's part of the problem. And for a moment, we're setting aside the fact that we have just incentivized gambling, legalized sports, betting, all of those things in the state, which I've got I've got issues with, but that has happened. And so as a result of in of bringing a lot of new gamblers onto the scene in North Carolina, there's a bunch of gamblers that are now saying, hey, I'm being taxed on everything I and here's here is the the the the way that this has been working is that you have to report your winnings. So if you win on a bet, you win $500, $15,000. Those winnings are taxable. However, we all know that when you gamble a lot, you don't just win, you lose often, right? So you have all these bets where you lose $1,000, you lose $500. Those losses could not be deducted against the winnings. Now, we all know the math shows the reason why they have giant casinos all over the world and why there's so many sports books and sports betting companies is that everybody loses more than they win on balance. So when you become a gambler, you're not gonna get more money on balance. But this allows those uh the gamblers to offset their losses against their winnings in their tax bill so that they not only have not because the the way the situation is right now is I'll lose $20,000 gambling, but then I had $10,000, but but in some cases I won $10,000. So my net losses as an individual is maybe $10,000 over the course of the year. So I've lost $10,000, but I also have to pay taxes on the $10,000 that I won. And that's what the state has been trying to solve. Does that make sense to you? Or did I just confuse everyone? Right, okay. So that that's what the situation is, and so those are the facts, but the question I I I have and I'd like to kind of discuss with you for a moment, get your thoughts on, is in light of our framework of rewarding good, punishing evil, where would we categorize the ability to deduct gambling losses? Because the gambling activity itself is not constructive and not helpful. We should not incentivize people to do that. As a matter of fairness, we're now treating gambling like all of our other losses because we know in a business you make money, but you also lose money, and you can offset your um winnings with your losses, right? Your business expenses is how you might call that. That's how we treat every other business. Now we're trying to treat gambling like every other business. Should we do that or not?

SPEAKER_00 28:40

I think the question would be does this further incentivize or entice people to gamble?

SPEAKER_01 28:49

Yes. I think the answer is yes. Because it makes the given our framework, we would not like this.

SPEAKER_00 28:55

That's what I think. I mean that's yeah, that's right.

unknown 28:58

Yeah.

SPEAKER_00 28:59

Kind of reminds me that you're telling me about this while sitting in Las Vegas. We can even talk about that.

SPEAKER_01 29:05

We have not done, yeah. For those who are watching, wondering where I am, yes. I I am presently recording uh from Las Vegas. Um I have gambled zero dollars and zero cents and will intend to do that. This is my my launch point to a hiking trip in southern Utah. But yes, I am here. But yeah, but but truly, yeah, no, you'll look behind me right now and you see all the evidence of the fact that the house wins, right? That's the whole that that's the game. These casinos are do not exist because everybody comes here and cleans them out. We all know that. So I I'm ready for yeah, go ahead and give me the next one.

SPEAKER_00 29:42

Yeah. Do you have one more thing to say about Nope, go for it. Okay. All right. So um the budget also included $3.5 million for the Teen Pregnancy Prevention Initiative. And this is the program that funds the PrEP program, which funds ECU's reproductive health training workshops uh that teach about sex education. And we've been uh NC Values has been aware of issues with this PrEP program for a while in North Carolina. Uh what one of the problems with it is that the curricula they're using, it goes beyond the program's intent, which is uh teen pregnancy prevention and teaches gender ideology things. Um just a couple of examples. In the curriculum, it says that male and female are nothing more than what the doctor said they were when they were born, and that being gender queer is a valid category. It says uh not to use the words girl and woman, but instead to use phrases like person with a vulva. And teachers are asked, uh told to ask children what pronouns they prefer, and students are told that uh someone with male genitalia might not necessarily identify as a boy or as a man. And so obviously, we're against these kinds of any funding going towards uh this type of curriculum. Uh, and another problem with the uh PrEP funds is that they're being used to implement sex education programs that violate North Carolina raw law, which actually requires abstinence-based sex education as opposed to um, you know, teaching kids how to properly use a condom. Right.

SPEAKER_01 31:45

And this is a long-standing challenge in in our educational system and kind of public health, is because everybody is a fan of quote unquote health training, right? We want people to have a basic education about their bodies and how to make good choices and how to be healthy. But there's so much value stuff that gets pushed into these programs that really is putting it pushing the agenda that we're all familiar with now. And what you described there, uh a lot of that is just kind of gender ideology. Um, that you gotta get under the surface. The devil is very often in the details in education and policy in general, and and that's where we see this. It's like, oh, we're gonna fund public health. Well, great. We want the public to be healthy, and then you see, oh, well, that seems problematic. Is that health or is that anti-health? Right? That's that that's the problem, which is why we have to be, you know, in the details of all these things, because the temptation is just to have a headline, have a budget line item, pass it off to an expert and say, you go do your thing. And when that expert has been radicalized, the thing that they go do is is not positive at all.

SPEAKER_00 32:58

Yeah, well, I think what you said, you hit the nail on the head. These things really can't be taught from a values neutral position. Values are always going to be inserted in conversations about human sexuality and uh what's the what framework are we teaching the children from? Um it's it's really important to be clear about that. And you know, to be honest, I I think probably the General Assembly isn't into these details. I mean, many of them may not know. Uh, you know, they haven't looked up this curriculum and they're reading through. Oh, they're they're asking, you know, the students what pronouns they prefer in some of these they may not know, you know. Um, so anyways, it's that's why you need watchdogs. Yeah, yeah. It's this is something we're trying, we've I've published an op-ed on this is something we're trying to raise awareness for. Um, you know, at the very least, amending this curriculum.

SPEAKER_01 33:56

That's right. Actually, before we wrap this up, this budget conversation, a couple other things I think that are worth mentioning. Um some something that's not in there. We've discussed on the program before the debate over uh $600 million for major league baseball in Raleigh was kind of one of the efforts, and that actually was a big issue uh that was debated before the budget was passed. That's not there. So um yeah.

SPEAKER_00 34:23

So I went home and I asked my husband about this. Okay. And it very much, he's very much, you know, free market, capitalism, all that, but he was like, Yeah, we should bring the baseball stadium. He had a lot of the same arguments that you did about you know how it would stimulate the local economy and all of that.

SPEAKER_01 34:40

So it's it's massive economic activity, but obviously the the the state legislature did not see it that way. And there are limits to funds, right? I mean, six hundred million dollars is isn't it?

SPEAKER_00 34:49

I think they did I think I think I saw the speaker say that it's not off the table forever.

SPEAKER_01 34:54

So Okay, well, who knows? Yeah, I I wouldn't say I'm disappointed, it's just that I see why somebody would want to do that. I I think there is a defensible argument for that.

SPEAKER_00 35:04

Sure.

SPEAKER_01 35:04

Um, also three million dollars for a responsible fatherhood initiative, um, which was in the budget and and in the world of rewarding good and punishing evil, there is nothing better than responsible fatherhood, and we can track basically all of the problems that we have in the world right now, to the fact that homes are broken and kids are not known and loved by their dads. And so um three million dollars isn't going to fix that problem. Of course, government is not really the place where that problem gets fixed, but there are conversations that we can facilitate and and ministries that we can help support, uh, where people who are, you know, in the ground on the ground in their community, um encouraging men to be better fathers, uh helping young men grow up to aspire to be a great father and have that be kind of their vision of the good life and what that means. Because that really is all the stuff we complain about, it just goes back to the the the blocking and tackling of human civilization, and that is great dads, great moms. So that's in there as well. The church is gonna do a lot more on the fatherhood thing than the government ever can, but we certainly need the government to recognize it's a problem. So um that's a small thing. Uh I don't think it was have no reason to think it was controversial because everybody uh likes fatherhood. Um, but it's in there and and we should know that. So that's I hope it works.

SPEAKER_00 36:26

That's good.

SPEAKER_01 36:26

Yes.

SPEAKER_00 36:27

So uh there wasn't a lot of social policy in this budget, but there was one piece. Uh there's a new way now to challenge uh books and other classroom materials in public schools, and it involves creating a committee to uh review uh parental challenges to materials that are in the schools that are obscene or age inappropriate for the children. And so those can those councils that will review those objections will be made up of uh principals and teachers, and I think a parent needs to be on it. And so this is a good I we we think this is a good thing. Uh there are there are books we know we've worked with Pavement Education Project on this problem uh for many years. We know there are books in the schools that are obscene, in North Carolina schools. We know that there are books that are just not appropriate uh for for that age, and and maybe they can be moved to a high school. And so uh this is this is a good thing to to let the community be involved in filtering out some of these books that uh we I mean some of them no child should ever see. They should not be available, they should absolutely be removed from the books, from the shelves.

SPEAKER_01 37:52

The problem I think we're trying to get in front of here is that a lot of parents had kind of filed their complaint in an email or with a voicemail somehow into the ether and they never got a response, and nobody even gave them the dignity of acknowledging the concern, much less providing a response on the merits. So this basically requires school systems to have a process that parents can use to actually know that they have been heard and get a response to it. Because, I mean, maybe the parents are overreacting, we don't know. I mean, and and people might will always disagree about what's appropriate and what isn't, but at least the parents aren't going to be ignored, which has kind of been the status quo. And so, yeah, this is, I think, improvement in the system to ensure that we are actually partnering with parents and not just telling the parents to go away because you're annoying. And that's how a lot of parents have felt about these things. So uh that's something else that's positive, I think, that we can be happy about in the budget. So um, you know, of course, it was hundreds of pages long. We have not covered everything. If you want more, uh, you can find it with the assistance of the search engine of your choice. So go do that, all of you budget nerds out there. So Ashley, anything else?

SPEAKER_00 39:11

I think the only other thing to say is that you know, we have been hoping that the General Assembly will take action to protect girls' private spaces, girls and women's private spaces in North Carolina. We this is uh if you've been listening along and you've if you've been following us, you know that this is our the campaign that we've been working on. We want boys to be prevented from using girls' bathrooms and locker rooms in K through 12 schools, in universities, in uh rape crisis centers, uh also in prisons. And so we have not seen them take action on this step yet, but we have had some encouragement, and we talked about this on our last episode, but the West Virginia versus BBJ decision is really helpful on this front because it shows uh that the court is saying that when Title IX speaks of uh women and girls, it means a biological woman or a biological girl. It doesn't mean a man who is identifying as a woman or a girl. And so that is that is helpful on this front because there has been um there was a bad court decision that uh created some confusion in this space. And now that the Supreme Court has has said this, uh it's it's really created some clarity. So hopefully that will help in some of the school districts. But um we are still hopeful that the General Assembly will take action on this piece, this session, and we are having as many conversations as we can with lawmakers so that they know that this is still happening in North Carolina schools, and um the federal government is investigating, uh the Department of Education is investigating this happening in Bunkham County and Caberas County. So we we do know that it's happening and and we hope that uh there will be a solution soon. Because really, every day that we have the status quo and it's not made clear that in North Carolina boys shouldn't go into girls' bathrooms, we're really risking something bad happening um in those spaces.

SPEAKER_01 41:34

That's right. That has not been done yet, but uh we remain optimistic that we're gonna be able to do that.

SPEAKER_00 41:38

We do also vigilant.

SPEAKER_01 41:41

Remain vigilant and stay tuned because we'll tell you all about it. Thanks for joining us today. Friends on politics for happy people. Quick reminder that new episodes drop every Tuesday and every Friday. So make sure you look for the next one. Like and subscribe wherever you have found us so you don't miss it. We look forward to talking to you then.