Stark contrasts in US House District 13 race: Brad Miller vs. Bill Randall

Brad Miller (left) and Bill Randall at the Greensboro Historical Museum.

Democratic incumbent Brad Miller and Republican challenger Bill Randall played rough at a candidate forum hosted by Guilford County Unity Effort tonight at the Greensboro Historical Museum. Supporters clapped often during their respective candidates’ remarks, while responding to the opposition with derisive laughter.

Bipartisan cooperation vs. partisan warfare

Bill Randall: “I am really miffed in trying to grasp how I should answer the question. I can say fundamentally and theoretically I can imagine there are things that we should be able to agree upon: things like protecting our borders, things like a balanced budget. But because we cannot come to agreement on those, does that mean that one side or both sides are wrong? I believe that you need to look at fundamentally the fact that today, in 2010, we have a division amongst the parties because primarily we have a philosophical difference on the direction that the nation needs to go. If you have a party that wants to take this country towards socialism and getting away from our individual responsibility, from responsible, limited government, I am not going to be part and parcel to going along to get along…. We have a country that’s on its way to financial ruin, and we need to stand tough on those things that actually cause this country to be great and that will prevent us from being great if we relinquish that responsibility.”

Brad Miller: “I think Mr. Randall just provided us with an excellent example of the kind of belligerent, scorched-earth partisan politics that undermines our political system and even, I think, threatens our democracy. The example he gave of immigration – there is no better example of how our system is broken than our inability to deal with the immigration issue. There is an obvious compromise the American people would favor and support and we can’t get there because politicians would rather have an issue than a solution.”

On healthcare reform

Miller: “Something has to give with healthcare. We are paying twice as much as the rest of the world is paying. We are paying 17 or 18 percent of our economy, our GDP. Countries like ours are paying about half that. And Americans don’t live as long and aren’t as healthy. We need to know what it means to have insurance. It needs to cover for existing conditions – something Mr. Randall has opposed. It needs to be something you can rely upon, and you know what’s covered and what’s not, and you don’t find out what kind of insurance you’ve got only when you get sick or you get hurt. And then you find out, even if you have insurance that you’re in bankruptcy. We have standards – because it didn’t cover what you needed because there’re caps for kinds of treatment or there is a copayment that you couldn’t begin to afford, and on and on. It needs to be predictable and reliable. You need to know what you’re getting. I support standard benefits. Like car insurance in North Carolina, every policy’s exactly the same. If we had every policy exactly the same in health insurance, it would make a world of difference. And we’re moving towards that standard benefits package.”

Randall: “The healthcare bill is absolutely not acceptable to the American people because it delivered things that we didn’t expect and we didn’t ask for. There’re things hidden in that bill that actually would make you shudder – things such as having a 1099 form required to do a transaction of $600 or more. What does that have to do with healthcare? What do student loans have to do with healthcare? Why do we have to insert that in a bill – over 2,000 pages – to get that through? Why did you tell the American people that you could keep your insurance when you know that that is not the case because your objective is going towards the single-payer. Why were we told by the Congressional Budget Office that the cost would go down, and then afterwards we find out that the costs are actually going to go up? Congressman Miller cited the Congressional Budget Office as an authoritative source; it’s true but they can only do things with the numbers that they get. And Congress fed them bogus numbers for the sake of getting that bill through. I’m for reform. I’m for getting rid of the things that are not acceptable in the bill. You can do tort reform. As a matter of fact, the overwhelming majority of these things center around costs. But much of what we have for costs are due to he fact that the federal government has its fingers and they’re manipulating things and telling you what you must have.”

On Social Security

Miller: “Social Security has got to be a rock-solid guarantee. Problems in Social Security are greatly overstated by people who were never for Social Security in the first place. We might have a problem in 30 or 40 years paying full benefits with a cost-of-living adjustment. All the estimates that we have for benefits between now and then, the worst thing that could happen under the Social Security law now is that we can’t pay full benefits with the income coming in from FICA taxes now we could ratchet back what we could pay. And the worst it would ever get to would be 80 percent. Now I don’t think we should reach that point; we’ve got 30 or 40 years to deal with the problem. If we had a more equitable distribution of wages, as we had in the past, more wages would go into the FICA system. Because all the growth in the economy has been going to people at the top – income above that cap on how much income is subject to FICA tax. It’s really recent that we have the problem that we have because the estimates, the assumptions back in the mid-’80s when Alan Greenspan headed the commission to make the changes that we have in effect now is that we would keep roughly the same distribution of income. If we addressed the inequality of income we’d probably fix the Social Security system. Having done this, I would prefer that we find other taxes for higher-income Americans to make the FICA tax more equitable than we have now so that people who really need to rely on Social Security to stay out of poverty will know it’s always going to be there for them.”

Randall: “That is absolutely amazing, Congressman. Absolutely amazing. I hope everyone was attentive on what he said. We have a Social Security system, and the shortfall we’re going to take from other things outside of the normal process to supplement. Why is that? The Social Security system – the trust fund – has been robbed by Congress. We have a system that is insolvent and cannot be sustained. What does the congressman recommend? He recommends that we take the money from rich people who don’t need it, and augment something that was robbed by Congress. You know, in my Bible, it says, ‘Thou shalt not steal,’ and you shalt not covet. No matter who’s hand it comes from, if you’re taking from someone that it’s not yours, it is stealing. And I’m saying the Social Security system needs to be revamped. The seniors that are already on Social Security, we need to continue to maintain that promise we made to them. We should not betray that trust and confidence, so we’re not touching that, nor those who are about to enter eligibility. But those that are younger, let’s look at some options at taking the Social Security tax, the FICA, and putting that into privatized accounts. There are many ways we could look at how you would do it, how much of it would go to privatized accounts, how much of it would still go to augment or supplement the current system. And then those that are younger – let’s say younger than 40 years old – to have them pay into privatized accounts. The stock market does have fluctuations; in the long term, it does show the upward trend and you will be able to have a system that’s solvent in the out years.”

Miller: “The Congressional Budget Office and the trustees of the Social Security system, the two credible [entities] on the Social Security system, disagree with Mr. Randall’s assessment. I imagine Mr. Randall means it, he’s sincere when he says that he’s committed to paying benefits to people who are over 65 now or whatever the age is, 67, who now qualify for Social Security, but he appears to not understand how the system works. If we allow everyone under the age of 50 or require everyone under the age of 50 to divert their FICA taxes away from the Social Security system, there would be no way to pay their benefits. And Mr. Randall said there were fluctuations in the stock market; it always comes back up. It dropped 40 percent in an 18-month period. Now, if you’re 70 years old and you’ve seen your stock portfolio you rely upon drop 40 percent in a two-year period, there’s probably not a lot of comfort to you that it’s going to come back eventually.”

On job creation

Miller: “I think we need to bring back manufacturing. We cannot survive as a service economy: We can’t just give each other golf lessons or haircuts. We’ve got to make something. I am for closing the tax breaks that companies get for sending jobs overseas. We’ve got to make business loans available to small businesses who’ve not been able to get ’em for the last couple years on ordinary terms. I’ve led the effort to make small business lending available and also with respect to the construction industry, which is a huge employer that we’ve got to bring back. We also need to get a hold of housing. Our economy as a whole is not going to be healthy when that big a part of our economy is as sick as it is. We’ve got to get control of the foreclosure crisis, so that foreclosures don’t continue to bring down home values, so that people are seeing their life savings, which is the equity they have in their homes, continue to decline. They aren’t going to make a consumer purchase – and consumer spending is two-thirds of our economy – if their life savings has disappeared in the collapse in the value of their home.”

Randall: “Think of yourself as a business owner. And I agree that we should do all we can to preserve jobs here in America, and particularly in North Carolina. Make yourself a business owner right now. And your federal government passes regulations that make it to where you actually cannot turn a profit in the United States because of things that they impose on your business. So I guess the answer that the congressman would have is that that factory should stay open for the sake of keeping people on the payroll instead of meeting the bottom line with a profit. Well, the reality is businesses do not open to give you or me or anyone else a job. Businesses open in the private sector with the objective of delivering a good and service… and to turn a profit. We need to examine what the federal government is doing to see, before we demonize companies that leave.”

On the Afghanistan war

Randall: “The way that we are going about it in the public arena, particularly in politics, to declare openly that we’re going to set a timetable for getting out does not send a clear signal to those that we are supporting. We also, as our government, interfered in the elections to try and influence and try and prevent the current president from getting elected. That sends a signal that is negative and wrong. So when you have the United States declaring that we’re going to possibly withdraw all our troops next year, it creates uncertainty. It is something that makes the Afghanistan government very, very wary of that because they know that if we depart they know they’re going to have to deal with the factions of the Taliban and the like. And if you put yourself in their position, when they’re behind the scenes threatening to behead you and other things when the United States leaves, that is going to cause you to broker deals with them that you would have ordinarily not done if you knew the United States was going to stand with you. Also our rules of engagement: Not letting our soldiers have munitions loaded and ready to fire, what kind of insanity is that when you don’t have a loaded weapon in a field of combat?”

Miller: “Our leadership, General Petraeus and former General McCrystal are two of the leading experts in counterinsurgency. So I think they know what needs to be done. They’re realistic. The problem is that we are now caught in the crossfire of someone else’s civil war. And the government for whom we are fighting does not have the support of the Afghan people, and it appears to a very large extent does not deserve the support of the Afghan people. The election was won widely regarded as of very questionable legitimacy, very questionable fairness, and the Karzai government is shot through with corruption. If it does not involve President Karzai himself, he tolerates it in the top officials of his own government, including his own brother. That government does not have the support of the Afghan people, and there is only so much we can do to win a war on behalf of a government that does not have the support of its own people.”

Closing statements

Miller: “I am committed to putting government on the side of people who are trying to work, to make an honest living, to support themselves, to support their families, to try to own a home, to put their kids through college, save for retirement, and not the people who have been looting the country for the last decade. And I really support policies to help ordinary families, which is where I think most people are. If you listen to everybody – you don’t just listen to the same people again and again – you understand that repealing the minimum wage, as Mr. Randall has proposed, does not help working families. Privatizing Social Security and Medicare, that doesn’t help working families. Ending Pell grants and student loans – I depended on student loans for my educations, and many middle-class families do. And my mother was a school teacher, so I know what middle class is. If we do that kids are not going to be able to afford college. I think making insurance cover preexisting conditions, which Mr. Randall opposes. I think extending unemployment benefits for the people who lost their jobs in this very tough economy so they can get by until things get better and they can find another job. And they are looking. They do not want to be on unemployment benefits; they want a job. And I want to help them pay their bills, pay their rent, pay their mortgage, buy groceries for their family until they can get a job. That is something that I support; Mr. Randall opposes.”

Randall: “We’re confronted with a decision. You’ve heard Congressman Miller open and talk about the values that he espouses and how he was raised. I’m just wondering, if those who raised him, if what he said is true, according to those values, what would they think if an organization that was founded for the express purpose of getting rid of undesirable races and calling black people ‘human weeds,’ what would those individuals think if such an organization that still exists today gave Congressman Miller its highest mark in Congress? As a matter of fact, we only have two congressman in the state of North Carolina that have received this organization’s highest rating. Bill Randall would score zero with this organization because of his principles. Congressman Miller scored 100 percent. What do you think about a congressman who’s values can get the highest marks of an organization that feels that there are races that are undesirable and should be eliminated and have not repudiated that stand to this day? We need to look at the real record. Attacks on my record, you can look at my website and view unedited footage in contrast to the commercials that you have. You think business as usual is the way to go, you may want to consider with your congressman. But if you believe in limited government, if you believe in responsible legislation, if you believe in a congressman that is going to stand for your positions and not waffle in the face of making a hard decision, if you want a representative form of government, I would ask you to consider me as your next congressman.”

As the candidates left the stage someone in the audience challenged Randall to name the organization he had linked to Miller.

“Planned Parenthood,” he answered.

Members of the audience cried out, expressing a range of reactions.

“Yay for Planned Parenthood,” one man said.

“How ’bout the children?” an elderly woman asked.

Candidate profile: Bill Randall

Bill Randall (right) visits with US Rep. Howard Coble and conservative activist Isabella Adkins at Bur-Mil Park in Greensboro in June.

Bill Randall, the Republican nominee challenging incumbent Democrat Brad Miller for the US House seat representing North Carolina’s 13th District, says the Obama administration and Democratic Congress’ effort to create jobs through stimulus spending and repealing the Bush-era tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans is exactly the wrong approach.

“We need to reduce burdensome taxes and regulation,” he says. “We have the second highest corporate tax rate in the free world behind Japan. We’re looking at the tax rate going up to 20 percent. That’s $200,000 for a business making a million dollars. You know what they could do with that? They could hire five employees at $40,000 with $200,000.”

The candidate calls for a reduction of “extensive regulation” on business, with the caveat that he’s not opposed to all regulation. Asked to provide specifics, he said some “unwarranted EPA regulation” should be reviewed, and reporting requirements should be streamlined so that industries report to one rather than five agencies. He adds that health and safety issues in industries ranging from poultry to offshore oil drilling are more tied to poor enforcement than inadequate regulation, characterizing the safety record of offshore oil drilling as “impeccable,” notwithstanding the Deepwater Horizon disaster.

Randall opposes Democratic efforts to phase out the Bush-era tax cuts for people in the highest income brackets, characterizing them as unfair and impractical.

“Why are you going to discriminate with concern to tax cuts?” he asked. “Why are you going to deny tax cuts to the so-called wealthy? The individuals in the upper income brackets are the ones who are going to invest it. If you were to seize all of the wealth of the rich today — individuals who comprise the upper part of our economy — you would only pay for a small fraction of the national debt. It’s not that taking money from the rich is going to make a substantive difference. I believe tax cuts ought to be extended to all risk takers. You need to have the tax breaks. The odds are against you. Eighty percent of all businesses fail in the first year. Ninety-six percent of all businesses fail in the first five years. The reward for risk is profit. As long as someone is not doing a ponzi scheme or defrauding someone else, they should be able to make money. We need to stop this class warfare of saying only tax cuts for the middle class.”

The healthcare reform legislation passed by the Democratic Congress and signed by President Obama remains a galvanizing issue for Randall, who traded on his tea party-movement bona fides to defeat a more moderate opponent in the Republican runoff election in June. “Abominable” and “detestable” are a few of the words he uses to describe the Affordable Care Act, which prevents health insurance companies from dropping subscribers based on preexisting conditions, allows young people to stay on their parents’ plans up to the age of 26, and reduces the cost of healthcare, according to Miller and many of his fellow Democrats.

Randall opposes the legislation on several levels, and disputes the notion that it will bend the cost curve.

“We were promised it was going to reduce healthcare costs,” he said. “The Congressional Budget Office is going to crunch the numbers based on what Congress gives them. The numbers weren’t based on reality; they were based on fantasy. Health costs are going to skyrocket. We were given false promises. It turns out to be a Pandora’s box with a nightmare unveiled every week. How in the world can you increase the number of people who are covered and not increase the cost?”

The Congressional Budget Office, whose mandate is to provide Congress with objective and nonpartisan analysis, estimates that healthcare reform will reduce federal deficits by $143 billion over the next decade.

Among Randall’s concerns is a provision he says was snuck into the bill that requires businesses to fill out a 1099 form every time they make a transaction of $600 or more. He said the provision is likely to have the unintended consequence of encouraging large companies with multiple vendors to consolidate accounts with the result that some of the vendors go out of business.

The candidate predicted that the reform legislation is likely to make parts of the business of providing healthcare so unprofitable that hospitals will have difficulty filling the positions, with the result that they will be forced to ration services.

Instead, Randall would like to see insurance companies be allowed to compete across state lines so that consumers can shop for the lowest price. He wants to “get government out of mandating” coverage, offering that preexisting conditions are to health insurance more or less what a record of DWIs or accidents are to auto insurance. Expanding the market for health insurance across state lines would reduce the cost of health insurance sufficiently to compensate for the rate increases imposed on people with preexisting conditions, he said.

Randall also favors tort reform to reduce the amount of money doctors and hospitals have to pay out to successful plaintiffs for medical malpractice, calling the current levels “ridiculous.”

A retired Navy command master chief, Randall differs with his opponent on the United States’ military commitment in Afghanistan. While Miller does not support an unending deployment in Afghanistan, Randall faults President Obama for setting a timetable for a drawdown of troops.

“I think the current policy needs to be revamped to allow our military to have the rules of engagement necessary to do their job,” he said. “Our military has had their hands tied with what they’ve been able to do and not been able to do.”

Randall also extends more credit to Afghan President Hamid Karzai than does Miller.

“A lot of criticism has been given to President Karzai,” the candidate said, “for the fact that he is pushing relations with the Taliban. I think a lot of that has to do with the uncertainty of the Americans. Karzai is no fool. If our president is talking in terms of, ‘We’re going to be leaving possibly next year,’ Karzai is looking at being strung up to the nearest tree.

“If we’re not clearly spelling out that we’re going to be there until victory is achieved, we are selling ourselves short and we’re not going to see the victory,” he added. “If we spelled out our mission clearly in an unambiguous manner, I think you would see that he would drive a hard bargain with the Taliban and al-Qaida.”

Guilford conservatives get campaign season underway with political picnic

Bill Randall (right) poses with fellow candidate Howard Coble and Conservatives for Guilford County activist Isabella Adkins.

Notwithstanding the efforts of Conservatives for Guilford County to establish a nonpartisan movement, the candidates that showed up for the group’s Take Back America Picnic at Bur-Mil Park yesterday evening were all Republicans, with the exception of one unaffiliated school board candidate.

A representative of the John Locke Foundation handed out “Tea Bags” – plastic bags containing the foundation’s publications and membership information – and told spectators that they have been working with dozens of candidates across the state, including the Republican nominee for the NC Senate District 28 seat in Guilford County. Hyde and NC House District 57 candidate Jon Hardister are both avowed fans of the Locke Foundation’s body of research and policy recommendations.

Estimated at upwards of 200 people by organizers, the crowd was fired up and energized. Guilford County Republican Party Chairman Bill Wright said he feels the party is fielding good candidates this year.

The star appearance may have been Bill Randall, who only three days earlier had trounced primary opponent Bernie Reeves in a runoff for US House District 13. Randall strolled around the grounds at the event early in the evening with 13-term Republican incumbent congressman Howard Coble, who introduced the new nominee from Raleigh to voters in his native Guilford County. Coble represents US House District 6. The two were a picture of old hand and young upstart, the seasoned incumbent who fended off a handful of primary contenders and the GOP challenger seeking to take on liberal Democrat Brad Miller.

Eating a hamburger under the shelter before the program of candidate remarks began, Randall reflected on Reeves’ sore-loser remark to the News & Observer that “it's sort of like anarchy out there.” The new nominee said his former opponent made some “strategic errors,” including disrespecting the Tea Party movement.

“One of the problems he had with that is his disparaging remarks were a matter of record,” Randall said. “And when confronted with it, he didn’t come clean. All he had to say is that ‘I did make remarks to that effect, although they may have been misconstrued or come across as more harsh than I intended,’” adding that Reeves should have then stated that he recognized the validity of sentiments held by Tea Party adherents.

“He has a lot to offer the Republican Party,” Randall continued. “He would do well to try to unify the base rather than divide the base. He missed a great opportunity because he didn’t concede with grace. The problem is that Bernie Reeves could not discern that there are some traditional Republicans who embrace the ideology of the Tea Party. And when you disparage the Tea Party you disparage those people who are rock-solid Republicans.”

Bill Randall, candidate for US House District 13

“Raise your hand if you’ve ever heard the argument that we need to get rid of illegal immigrants because they’re taking up welfare benefits and lining up in the emergency rooms – how many of you have ever heard that argument? Stop it. Stay with me. That’s not the argument. I say again, that’s not the argument.

“There are illegals in this country who’ve not once gone to emergency rooms, that are hardworking and industrious. But that’s not the argument. Because, see, if you argue from the standpoint of what they’re taking away in benefits, you’re disarmed when someone can prove that they’re not using them. Follow me. We need to learn how to craft our argument based on the US Constitution: And what’s at stake is the rule of law. Amen?

“Let’s say that you all went on a trip. Bill Randall comes to your neighborhood. I know you’re out of town. I break into your home. Inside your home I find everything in disarray. Some of you say, ‘Well, you see my teenagers at home’ – no, that’s… I’ve got kids, too. I find everything in disarray. Dishes stacked to the ceiling in the kitchen. Clothes in the laundry room, dirty, piled up. Windows dirty. Yard not cut. Everything is a mess. I go in there, wash all your dishes, sparkling clean, put ’em up in your cabinet, wash all the clothes, fold ’em, put ’em away, even iron your shirts, even clean the toilet bowl. Go into your refrigerator and I take things out and I cook a sumptuous meal. And that sumptuous meal is waiting on you when you get back home. Folks, you come in. You like what you see. But you get on the phone and you call the police. And I get carted away to jail. Is that the right thing to do or the wrong thing to do? It’s the right thing because I broke the rule of law. I don’t care what my intentions are; the rule of law is what prevails in this country.”


Jeff Hyde, a member of Conservatives for Guilford County who is challenging one-term Democrat Don Vaughan for the NC Senate District 27 seat, was introduced by his friend Brett Riddleberger as a “hardcore conservative.”

Jeff Hyde, candidate for NC Senate District 27

“North Carolina is struggling with prosperity. A once great state – still is a great state – we have beautiful aesthetics all across our state. We’ve got a great talent base. We have natural resources, but we are on our way with our state government to becoming New Jersey, Massachusetts, California, New York or Michigan, and I don’t think North Carolinians want that. I know that I don’t want that. Unemployment in North Carolina has been for 15 straight months above 10 percent. Democrats have no idea how to change that. Our solution is to take North Carolina from being the worst business-climate state in the Southeast and make it competitive with our Southeastern neighbors by reducing the tax burden on individuals, the tax burden on corporations, reducing our state gasoline tax – all these things add up to make North Carolina the 10th least likely state for businesses to succeed. The states around us – there’s no surprise – the nine states with the most economic activity are the nine states that don’t have a personal income tax. There’s no surprise in that. If we want North Carolina to be prosperous again, if we want to reduce our unemployment, we’ll put our money back into the private sector where we can incubate jobs around the kitchen table and entice new businesses to form in North Carolina and put private citizens back to work.”


Trudy Wade, a two-term member of the Greensboro City Council, is running for the open seat vacated by Democrat Katie Dorsett against two opponents: Democrat Gladys Robinson and independent Bruce Davis.

Trudy Wade, candidate for NC Senate District 28

“I now have two opponents. If you haven’t heard the news, I now have an unaffiliated running against me. One thing I want to make very clear about the two candidates running against me in Senate District 28: Both will vote for a tax increase, I can assure you of that. One has a proven record of voting for tax increases, and the other has openly stated that she’d be in favor in tax increases. You don’t have to worry about that with me. You can look at my record on the Greensboro City Council, and I haven’t voted for any tax increases.

“The other thing I want to bring to your attention is I’m worried about jobs because there’s not a lot of jobs out there for us and we definitely need to do something about that. What do we need to do? I’m a small business owner. We need to give small businesses a break and let us put people back to work because it is the only way we’re going to get this economy going again. Give me a break, let me pay somebody a salary, let them go out and buy from you and everyone else that runs a small business. Let us all get back to work.

“The other thing is I want to take care of some of that corruption in Raleigh. We need to get out; we need to vote. I can’t change it without you. If you don’t go out and vote this time we won’t get a change in Raleigh. But I can assure you, if you go out and vote and I’m elected, you will have a change in Raleigh.”


John Blust, who faces a nominal challenge from Libertarian Jeffery Simon, has become something of a role model for GOP candidates seeking legislative office in Raleigh, especially with the retirement of fellow Republican Laura Wiley in NC House District 61. Although he faces no Democratic opponent in his race, he’s weathered adversity by virtue of the fact that his entire career in the General Assembly has been spent as part of the minority party. He recruited Theresa Yon to run in Democratic-leaning District 59, and his limited government philosophy is emulated by another Republican challenger, District 57 candidate Jon Hardister.

John Blust, candidate for NC House District 62

“If you want to know why this is so important, turn around and look at those children back there. The latest figures I have seen say that the federal government has an unfunded liability, if you know what that means in accounting. It’s bad enough that we have a national debt right now that just went over $13 trillion; it’s approaching the level of the gross national product. The unfunded liability, what are the promises made by the politicians all these years is numbered now at $130 trillion, and somehow those children back there are going to have to come up with this money. Now, the opposition likes to think that they are pro-child; they claim to be pro-education, pro-child. And one of the tasks we have to do is we have to take them off their moral high ground and capture it ourself, because you are not for the children in any way if you are willing to saddle them with $130 trillion in debt. Don’t tell me you’re for the children.

“Don’t tell me you’re for education when the only education model we’ve seen is the one we’ve seen. They won’t allow us to go to charter schools. They won’t allow us to go to money-follows-the-student. We have some of the worst public schools K-12, but we have some of the best universities. Now, what’s the difference there? The universities you choose where to go. The students, the parents choose where to go. The K-12 is a monopoly. We debated a bill not long ago on how to handle low-performing, non-performing schools. This is 2010. I couldn’t help but be struck that this is 2010, and two education governors ago we had an education governor named Jim Hunt that said that if you spent the money they wanted to spend and you enacted the very agenda they wanted and they got their way on everything, every initiative, every cent they wanted for education is what happened, Jim Hunt said you’d be number-one by 2010. And here 2010 came and we were having to debate ways to handle non-performing, low-performing schools. And that was with Jim Hunt, “the education governor” from 1992 to 2010, then Mike Easley, soon to be indicted, an “education governor” from 2000 to 2008. Now, what happened? Maybe their fundamental model was wrong. Maybe it’s not just the money. Maybe, instead of approaching every program as if it’s a matter of government programs, government money, we have now come to the cliff.”


Republican Theresa Yon is challenging veteran Democratic lawmaker Maggie Jeffus in NC House District 59.

Theresa Yon, candidate for NC House District 59

“Just last week, House Bill 1973, film tax credit… this is a bill that had a lot of different tax credits and spending that individually probably would not have been passed. They put it all under one bill, and you get the film tax credit. This gives up to $20 million in tax credits for people that come to North Carolina to film movies on our coast. That’s all well and good, but it doesn’t help Guilford County. Here’s the idea: There’s no way that our tax dollars should be paid to Hollywood actors and producers to come here and film movies. And our representative, John Blust, put out an amendment in which he said, ‘We need to cap that; we shouldn’t be paying actors or people that are paid, you know, millions of dollars to make movies.’ That amendment was voted down by the Democrats and my opponent. So if someone comes and films a movie for $80 million, you the taxpayers write them a check for $20 million regardless of how much they pay in taxes. If an actor gets paid $12 million, the taxpayers write a $3 million check to him – 25 percent of their production cost is going to be funded now by the taxpayers with House Bill 1973. I think that’s a bad decision.

“Yesterday – here’s a good example for government interfering in your lives a little bit too much. Just yesterday the House voted on a bill and it has to do with childcare. A lot of you work, and maybe in the summertime your children are in daycare. Well, they’ve decided on a couple things that they know better what your children need than you do. No child over 1 year old is allowed to have four to six ounces of juice per day in daycare. No children over 2 years old are allowed to drink any whole milk, reduced fat only. And you are not allowed to bring sugar-sweetened sodas to daycare anymore, or they’ll be confiscated. So if you give your child a Coke once in awhile to take to daycare, it will be taken away…. So, that’s a bit of a disappointment, government interfering in our lives.”


Jon Hardister’s reluctance to take a firm position on a piece of legislation proposed by his Democratic opponent, Pricey Harrison, that would eliminate the cap on liabilities for offshore oil spills off the coast of North Carolina has been the object of a fair amount of discussion. He said after this speech that he has now come to the conclusion that eliminating the cap is the right thing to do.

His stump speech was more of less boilerplate Republican agenda, with little attention to specifics.

Jon Hardister, candidate for NC House District 57

“A lot of people don’t realize how high our taxes are in North Carolina. We have the ninth highest income tax, and that’s both corporate and individual. I believe you create jobs through the private sector. The government can’t create jobs. If you look at Virginia, for example, their taxes are lower, [and] their unemployment rate is a lot lower than ours. We have an unemployment rate that’s just over 11 percent. In Virginia, it’s just over 6 percent. It’s much lower. I believe it all comes down to a simple question: Do you think that government is the solution to our problems or the cause of our problems? (Cause.) Exactly. And, uh, I gotta tell you: We have an opportunity, this year, to take back our government. Okay, I’m a Republican. I’m proud to be a Republican. But that’s not what it’s all about. It’s about principle. It’s about what you stand for. And we have a lot of work to do. Republicans have a great opportunity now to take the state House and take the state Senate, and get some work done. We need to eliminate wasteful spending and we need to go to zero-based budgeting. We need some spending-cap legislation and we need to eliminate the cap on charter schools. I’ll tell you what. Here’s how I look at it: When the economy started to get bad I had to tighten my belt, and I had to be careful about my expenditures. Government should do the same thing. It’s our money they’re spending. Politicians have a responsibility to be careful with spending policies.”


Lisa Ingle Clapp, an unaffiliated challenger, faces two-term Democrat Nancy Routh in the nonpartisan contest for one of the at-large seats on the Guilford County School Board.

Lisa Ingle Clapp, candidate for Guilford County School Board at large

“I think it’s very important to vote for a candidate who has children coming in and out of their doors every day, not just my own boys but their friends and their friends’ parents. And you know how we parents network and talk about what’s going on at the school level. A couple of things I wanted to make a point about. One thing is in Guilford County I think we lack in the school system, accountability, on a couple of different levels. The first level is I think we need to hold the Guilford County School Board accountable for how their spending our hard-earned tax dollars. I don’t know about you guys, but I’m a hard-working – my husband is a hard-working person and we pay lots of taxes, as all of you do as well. When you study up on what’s going on with the school board, you never know where your money’s going. And I think the truth and transparency approach to that would be very applicable at this point, especially since our superintendant, Mo Green, speaks of that in his strategic plan of transparency. So I’m running on transparency. If you want truth and transparency, I’m your girl.

“The other thing I wanted to bring forward was parent accountability. We need to hold our parents accountable to stay involved enough with their children that they know what’s going on inside of their school doors everyday. A lot of things take place in our schools that we don’t ever know about as the general public. That’s one of my biggest, biggest pet peeves with the school board, and one of the main reasons I decided to run. And I’ll tell you briefly about that and then I’ll close. When we have convicted felons who are bringing loaded handguns into high schools and middle schools, folks we got a problem. We got a problem with a school board who wants to do away with our SRO officers in the middle of our middle and high schools, because we need ’em. We need ’em desperately. And we need a voice on that school board who is going to keep those SRO officers in their positions. I’m sick and tired of taking my own two children to school and having to worry about their safety when they’re not on my watch. In order for us to make a difference in that, you’ve got to have truth and transparency. I have numerous e-mails and phone calls every single week since I’ve decided to run for school board at large from parents, and from staff and from teachers who tell me over and over the things that go on behind closed doors that nobody knows about because their acts of violence and they’re pushed under the rug, so to speak. Because we don’t need to know about it, as parents and taxpayers. I’m here to tell you: It’s time for us to face the music. We got to know what’s going on so that we can restore safety, discipline and respect back into our schools. If that’s what you want in a candidate – a voice for the people, for the students, for the staff and for the teachers and the parents, then on Nov. 2, vote Lisa Clapp for school board.”


Becki Gray, John Locke Foundation

“The forefathers also gave us a gift. That gift was freedom. But that gift has been abused, it’s been misused, it is in danger and it is in peril. Our country is in trouble. We have a healthcare bill that no one wanted, that was shoved through Congress and shoved down our throats. Spending is out of control. National security is at risk. We finally have a state that has stepped up and done something about illegal immigration, and what’s our president doing? He’s going to sue that state. We have a government that wants to do everything for everybody with no concern for what it costs. And all of these things are taking away our freedom, chipping away at that.

“So are we safe here in North Carolina? Are our state leaders protecting our freedoms? They’re not. We have corrupt politicians that we can’t trust who are lining their pockets with our tax money. Just read the latest edition of Carolina Journal to find out who’s been indicted today. And the list keeps getting longer and longer. Unemployment is in double digits and has been for the last 15 months. North Carolina has one of the highest tax rates in the Southeast. Government is everywhere in our lives, telling us how, when and where we can live to the point of being ridiculous. Do you know that there are counties in North Carolina, there are places in North Carolina where plastic bags have been outlawed? There’s a smoking ban in effect in North Carolina where the government is telling us where we can smoke in businesses we own. Now I’m not a big smoker – I’m not a smoker at all, I don’t like to be around cigarette smoke – what I really don’t like is the government telling me what I can do and can’t do in establishments that I own. They want to tell us where we can water our lawns, even in the mountains what color to paint our house, what kind of light bulbs to use, and all the while they’re continuing to increase the entitlement programs that people get more dependent, more government and more government control. And the cost of all this government in North Carolina: Do you know that since 1980, North Carolina’s budget has increased 190 percent? And during that period population has only grown 62 percent. So keep that in mind.”

Randall admits campaign plagiarized Scott Brown

Bill Randall, a candidate for the Republican nomination for the North Carolina Congressional District 13 seat currently held by Democrat Brad Miller, admits that his campaign plagiarized material from the campaign of Republican Scott Brown, the new senator from Massachusetts.

"Someone who was on the campaign made an unauthorized inclusion of that information on my website," Randall tells YES! Weekly. "If there was anything that was unauthorized, it was taken off. It was submitted to the former webmaster by someone who is no longer with the campaign."

Randall said it is possible that his campaign might have also plagiarized other sources.

"You could have the lion's share from Scott Brown and some from other sites," he said, "but the bottom line is, if I wasn't the author, it's gone."

In a formal statement posted today on the Randall campaign website the candidate suggests that for months he was unaware of the exact wording of his own campaign platform.

"This action took place earlier this year as my campaign sought to upgrade the website design and content," Randall said in the statement. "I authored the initial version of all subjects listed under 'Issues' from the original (old) website. I assumed that the content was transferred to the new website unaltered. I was not aware of the unauthorized inclusions. On occasion, I revisited the "2nd Amendment" and "Right to Life" tabs from time to time and did not note any modification of their content. I do not recall having to revisit the other subjects as the months ensued, and quite frankly, took for granted that they were unaltered."

Randall added, "For the record: I now have hard evidence (provided by our former webmaster) that this took place, and that it was done (by the former campaign volunteer who acted on their own volition) with the intent to deceive."

The candidate declined to identify the former campaign worker, and told YES! Weekly that at this time he has no plans to take legal action against the person.

On Monday, Randall sidestepped an accusation by the campaign of Republican opponent Bernie Reeves that he had plagiarized the famous Sharon Statement in a "Charter of Principles" that was published first in 2004 and then in 2009 by the candidate.

Carter Wrenn, a consultant with the Reeves campaign, told YES! Weekly that Randall is not being candid.

"He posted a plagiarized statement Monday, was caught and tried to cover it up by putting a footnote on the statement and claiming that explained everything," Wrenn said. "We pointed out the footnote wasn’t there for the last six months, and gave 10 more examples of plagiarism. He said he said he didn’t know anything about it, that a campaign aide had done it, and it wasn’t his fault. The information has been on his website for months and he didn’t know about it?"

Other parts of Randall's platform appear to have been plagiarized from the Republican National Committee website (below) and Indiana congressman Dan Burton.

A screen shot of the Randall campaign's position statement on economy and jobs captured by Roch Smith Jr., a Greensboro web consultant, at about 1:30 p.m. yesterday shows identical language to the Republican National Committee on these topics.

The Randall campaign website read, “I firmly believe that low taxes are necessary because individuals know best how to make their own economic and charitable choices. Simply put, I support logical business regulations that encourage entrepreneurs to start more businesses so more individuals can enjoy the satisfaction and fruits of self-made success.”

Republican National Committee website reads: “The Republican Party supports low taxes because individuals know best how to make their own economic and charitable choices.... “The Republican Party is supportive of logical business regulations that encourage entrepreneurs to start more businesses so more individuals can enjoy the satisfaction and fruits of self-made success.”

The Reeves campaign provided a screen shot of the Randall campaign website's "issues" page that is time-stamped 10:29 a.m. on May 25 that indicates seven separate instances of plagiarism from the successful US Senate campaign of Scott Brown of Massachusetts.

Opponent asks whether congressional candidate Randall plagiarized

Bernie Reeves, a candidate in the Republican runoff for North Carolina's 13th Congressional District, is challenging opponent Bill Randall on whether he plagiarized The Sharon Statement, written at the home of conservative activist William F. Buckley as the founding charter for Young Americans for Freedom in 1960.

In a press release today, the Reeves campaign submits seven examples of how a "Charter of Principles" of Bill Randall's grassroots organization Concerned Citizens for Truth borrows exact wording — or almost exact, in some cases — from The Sharon Statement.

"The problem here," said Reeves in a prepared statement, "is when a candidate plagiarizes someone else's words and say they are his own he not only hurts his campaign, he hurts the Republican Party and conservatives in general. Bill needs to offer a clear explanation."

UPDATE: Randall tells me in a phone conversation that he did not plagiarize The Sharon Statement, and says a "footnote" at the bottom of the Concerned Citizens for Truth web-page will answer my questions.

The footnote reads, "The CCFT 2004 original charter statement (clearly referenced at the top of this webpage) contains this disclaimer: 'Our charter parallels some of the basic tenants adopted by the American Conservative Union.' The original, unaltered charter statement has an electronic date/time stamp of 12-1-2004 @ 3:32 PM. There has been no attempt by the Randall for Congress campaign to plagiarize others' work or information."