Republicans announce plan to redraw congressional map
North Carolina lawmakers on Monday announced plans to redraw the state’s congressional map to secure an additional seat for Republicans in the 2026 midterms.
In a joint statement, House Speaker Destin Hall and Senate leader Phil Berger announced they would heed President Donald Trump’s national push to redraw maps in Republicans’ favor and vote on a new map next week.
“President Trump delivered countless victories during his first term in office, and nine months into his second term he continues to achieve unprecedented wins,” Berger said. “We are doing everything we can to protect President Trump’s agenda, which means safeguarding Republican control of Congress.”
Democrats quickly lambasted the plan, noting that Republicans in the state legislature have yet to pass a comprehensive budget this session.
“NC Republicans are lining up to kiss Trump’s ass before they do anything to help North Carolinians afford healthcare, energy bills, or groceries,” Senate Democrats said in a statement on social media. “They’ll always side with Trump and billionaires before they do anything for YOU.”
Last month, Berger denied rumors that he would redraw the state’s map in exchange for an endorsement from Trump in his primary election, though he left open the possibility of another round of redistricting.
North Carolina’s current congressional map already heavily favors Republicans and is being challenged in court for alleged racial gerrymandering.
Ten Republicans and four Democrats represent the state in Congress. A new map would likely target Democratic Rep. Don Davis’ district in Northeastern North Carolina.
North Carolina is the latest state to dive into the national redistricting battle, which began after Texas redrew its congressional map to give Republicans an additional five seats. California retaliated by proposing a new map likely to pick up five seats for Democrats.
“Our state won’t stand by while Democrats like Gavin Newsom redraw districts to aid in their effort to obtain a majority in the U.S. House,” Hall said in a statement, referring to the governor of California.
North Carolina has a chaotic history when it comes to redistricting, with courts frequently striking down legislative and congressional maps as illegal gerrymanders. If lawmakers were to approve a new congressional map this year, it would be the fifth map in just six years.
New maps do not require approval from the governor and can be enacted with simple majorities in both chambers of the state legislature, which are controlled by Republicans.
In a statement, Democratic Gov. Josh Stein denounced the news, writing “The General Assembly works for North Carolina, not Donald Trump.”
“… These shameless politicians are abusing their power to take away yours,” he continued. “I will always fight for you because the voters should choose their representatives, not the other way around.”
ABC Privatization
The evergreen topic of privatizing liquor sales in North Carolina was aired again Wednesday, with legislators on the House Select Committee on Government Efficiency questioning the finances — and the philosophical implications — of the current system.
Alcoholic Beverage Control Commission Chairman Hank Bauer told committee members that the state receives about $540 million in excise taxes each year, while county control boards contribute around $170 million each year locally. Harder to measure are additional financial benefits, such as when local boards hire police officers or make grants to localities, he said.
Bauer said he is aware of how popular the idea of privatization is, but that the profitability of the current system makes any privatization plan problematic. “I have people come up to me at parties and talk about [how] we should privatize,” he said. “The biggest thing is, are you willing to give up the $540 million or the $3.4 billion that we gave back in the last five years? Because a lot of that would be gone.”
Rep. Keith Kidwell, R-Beaufort, disputed that prediction, noting that excise taxes would still be charged and other predicted losses could be accounted for in the wording of any privatization law. “I'm going to bet you I could work out a structure that would give the money that's required for the enforcement, just like we did with sports betting, just like we did with the lottery,” he said.
Kidwell said that all ABC revenue derives from the taxpayer, and that many believe local ABC boards suffer from “a significant amount of cronyism.”
But at the root of Kidwell’s questions, he said, are his libertarian beliefs.
“I think it's safe to say that the taxpayers, or consumers in this case, are actually paying for what you're turning back over to the state, as you call it,” he said. “...Why is the state in any business? Can you answer that?”
Bauer said he believes the more revenue the state can collect, the better for state budgeting. Kidwell differed. “Just because we can tax something I don't think means we should,” he said. “So I would absolutely be in favor of privatizing.”
On a separate topic, Bauer said many problems and inefficiencies stem from a lack of warehouse capacity. The shuffling of inventory between warehouses and local boards leads to products being handled as many as five times. “If we were private retail we would be out of business,” he said.
A new centralized warehouse with full automation and sufficient capacity would generate $132 million in additional revenue, of which $8 million would return to the general fund, Bauer said. He asked that legislators consider funding construction at a cost of about $210 million, which the ABC Commission could repay in six or seven years.
Legislators questioned why the ABC Commission would wait on uncertain funding from the General Assembly instead of securing building funds on the private market. “What stops you from going and getting private funding to build that warehouse and then, in turn, using the same revenue to pay it off?” Rep. Mark Brody, R-Union, asked.
Bauer noted that while the State Capital Infrastructure Fund does not charge interest, bankers do.
FEMA Reimbursements
The state says it’s not expecting the Oct. 1 shutdown of the federal government to further delay already obligated funds North Carolina is slated to receive from the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s public assistance grant program. The grants, which cover at least 90% of eligible work, have gone to state, local governments and other entities for disaster-related projects, like debris removal, in the aftermath of Tropical Storm Helene.
“We have received no communication from FEMA that would suggest any further delays to Helene reimbursements, though we are watching the situation closely,” North Carolina Emergency Management spokesperson Justin Graney told the Citizen Times in an Oct. 6 email.
North Carolina Emergency Management oversees the reimbursement application process for the state and local governments. The September 2024 storm killed more than 100 people in North Carolina and caused nearly $60 billion in damage. Since Helene hit, local governments and other entities have been awarded $784 million in public assistance grants, according to FEMA. In September, the agency approved funding for several major projects, including the city of Asheville's water treatment system, which Helene severely damaged.
Still, Buncombe County, which has been awarded $16.4 million in FEMA public assistance grants, has only received $2.2 million of that total as of Sept. 29, according to a county report presented to its Board of Commissioners. So far, the county has submitted about $30 million in grant applications, according to the report, and is expected to submit another $21 million.
“At this point, our projects are continuing to move through the FEMA review steps, though delays may be possible if the shutdown is lengthy,” county spokesperson Lillian Govus told the Citizen Times in an Oct. 6 email.
While many federal agencies have furloughed large shares of staff, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, which oversees FEMA, has not. According to the department’s government shutdown contingency plan, only about 4,000 FEMA employees, or 16% of the agency’s nearly 25,000 employees, were expected to be furloughed.
In an Oct. 6 email to the Citizen Times, a FEMA spokesperson said the agency's "critical functions" would continue during the shutdown and funding for debris removal and emergency protective projects would be prioritized.