Carolina Journal Radio No. 846: New Duke research raises serious questions about Medicaid

From Cherokee to current tagging from the largest city to the smallest town and from the statehouse into the schoolhouse Carolina Journal radio your weekly news magazine discussing North Carolina's most of public policy events and issues welcome to Carolina Journal radio I Michiko got during the next hour, Donna Martinez and I will explore some major issues affecting our state. The US Supreme Court's latest term included rulings with direct impacts on North Carolina elections and taxation. You'll hear expert analysis of these cases. Other major Supreme Court rulings and the high courts latest trends. A resolution honoring Pres. Trump's post-NAFTA trade deal hit a snag in the statehouse you learn why state lawmakers continue to hear arguments in favor of the second chance act to hear details about the proposal and you'll hear good news about regulatory reform in North Carolina along with the latest evidence panning film incentives. Those topics are just ahead. First, Donna Martinez joins us with the Carolina Journal headline the defining disagreement between Gov. Roy Cooper and legislative leaders over a new state budget has been whether or not to expand Medicaid in North Carolina several million people in our state, including the children poor, the elderly are actually receiving health insurance coverage through this government program, but as we debate, adding more than 1/2 million new people to the Medicaid rolls. Which is what Gov. Roy Cooper wants to do. Questions remain over how the program is actually serving those who are currently covered by Jordan Roberts is the healthcare policy analyst for the John Locke foundation. He's been studying this issue quite intently, and he joins us now with the latest Jordan. Welcome back to the show government. There is a new Duke study Duke researchers who are looking at the question of Medicaid in North Carolina. What did the researchers find.

Basically, they found that you know there's about just over 2 million people in the Medicaid program right now and a lot of those folks in the more rural parts the state they see higher healthcare, higher Medicaid spending per beneficiary and lower health outcomes and so you have the researchers found that no this is totally explained by a rock of access in these rural areas that is leaving these folks have worse outcomes and spend more Medicaid money. That's an unfortunate conclusion for everyone.

Whether you are part of the program or not, because certainly this is a federal state program so were all paying for this.

We want the best for the people who are enrolled in the program they're talking about while spending lots of money, but really not seeing healthier people. Yeah that's right so you may questions of the study.

They wanted to look out where you know how and where our Medicaid dollars being spent.

North Carolina was the relationship between dollars spent and health outcomes and you know in looking at this morning to test importer hypotheses and assumptions about healthcare Medicaid and what those were. Were you know these rural counties that face more socioeconomic barriers. You would think that the people would have a lower baseline level of health and another one was that the areas where there's this lower baseline level of health more healthcare spending per beneficiary really wanted to test some core assumptions about Medicaid and the Medicaid program were generally in one of those assumptions is that more dollars spent would equal better health outcomes.

Another one is that areas where were spending more money should be more doctors to facilitate their services and really came away with three big findings. I think really speak to some of the shortfalls in the Medicaid program. Now the first one was that in the more eastern and western parts of the state. They found that there is hotspots of high levels of health spending year-over-year. Not much change and they also found that in these hotspots there are lower levels of health outcomes, worse health outcomes. So this you know, doesn't prove that one is core assumptions that more Medicaid spending equals better health outcomes. They also found that in these hotspots disease burden you know level sickness really wasn't much different than more urban and more lower level spending counties. So this poses a question while we think that more sick places in the country in the state would have higher levels of spending and I was in the case and explain this simply by a lack of access to basic preventative healthcare services that we know these, you know, medical deserts and the part of the state suffer from, and the third finding they found was that know where there's higher health spending. There's less. Doctors also contrary to that assumption about Medicaid that if there's more health spending. There should be more doctors to facilitate that health spending okay so that this a lot of information to try to digest TR what is your take away Jordan as to what we should learn from this study that could help inform our discussion about whether or not to add more than half million people to North Carolina's Medicaid rolls rates. I think there's two things. The first one is that you know health insurance does not equal healthcare and healthcare does not equal health so you know there's this breakdown that you know just because you have insurance that means you can get access to healthcare and we see that that's just not true.

With these Medicaid beneficiaries in these more deserted, more rural you know socioeconomically challenge parts of our state.

They just don't have good health outcomes and not simply a matter of access, so that alone yet so if the issue is not having health insurance for the nuclear population, but they got insurance to Medicaid but they're still having trouble finding a doctor or maybe a specialist by someone who can give them quick services at the problem right� Emphasis on basic preventative primary care.

They just these folks really don't have access to, and so they forgo that type of care, and then this higher spending comes from the they develop chronic diseases and it's more expensive of the long term to treat these diseases when you know a lot of it could've been mitigated maybe by just more emphasis on basic preventative care in the first place. So what can we do, what reforms or changes could we actually could we make sure that that we make some decisions on that right now could help to change that outcome to give people more access.

Yeah so there's some some that we been advocating for here, the John Locke foundation and out of a mention the paper. One of those is to know we the look at what it means to be a provider and so they offer you know the suggestion to invest in telehealth and telemedicine to really know reach these people virtually and you know try to make up some the shortfalls there.

Another one is to reinvest in the workforce specifically with nurse practitioners and advanced practice registered nurses because a lot of these counties. That's all they've got. And if we change the laws governing nurse practitioners. They may be more likely to serving. These are to treat folks in these counties, and more likely to stay there. So another one is a certificate of need draws a lot of these counties that other people have to drive very far away for hospitals and specialists and so you know when there's not an immediate supply.

You may not want to take your whole day to go up to the hospital and get checked out. So it's increasing the supply of these areas and removing the policies that you limit the supply.

Here's a frightening thought is we have been seeing and hearing this discussion about whether or not to add 500 to 600,000 more people onto the Medicaid program. Let's just say for the sake of discussion, Jordan, that North Carolina were to expand Medicaid are all these new people. What about the medical professionals to take care of them when they tried to call up and schedule an appointment right in excess from one of her big concerns is not that we don't want these people to have healthcare insurance wearing investing large government programs. That's roughly $14 billion in federal and state money.

We want the best efficient outcomes and right now the Medicaid program has all the shortfalls they aren't serving these people and so more people to program when there is access problems all around the state. That's probably not yield the health outcomes. A lot of people think and we we now have proof of it and some good research on you where the deficiencies are not just simply a lack of access to these basic preventative services in their local communities and lastly Jordan.

We have also seen over the last months. The state auditor release audits of the Medicaid program of the administration. The eligibility requirements, which in some cases have not been followed problems on the administration side as well right and so you decide to hold another aspect to this that you know we have a very unique state a very rural state and we need to rethink about how we deliver care to these folks and you know there's problems with what you said the administration and the funding so we need to just work together on the ground and in Raleigh and of these County level health departments to better serve these folks that are living in the shadows.

Jordan Roberts is healthcare policy analyst for the John Locke foundation. Thank you thank you this much. North Carolina general radio to come in just a moment tired of fake names tired of reporters with political axes to grind.

What you need to be reading Carolina Journal honest uncompromising old school journalism you expect and you need even better, the monthly Carolina Journal is free to subscribers sign up at Carolina. Journal.com.

You'll receive Carolina Journal newspaper in your mailbox each month. Investigations into government spending revelations about boondoggles who the powerful leaders are and what they're doing in your name and with your money. We shine a light on it all with the stories and angles. Other outlets barely cover but there's a bonus print newspapers published monthly by our daily news site gives you the latest news each and every day lot on the Carolina Journal.com once, twice, even three times a day won't be disappointed.

It's fresh news if you'd like a heads up on the daily news sign up for daily email do that Carolina Journal.com Carolina Journal rigorous unrelenting old school journalism.

We hold government accountable for you will connect Carolina Journal radio I Michiko got the latest US Supreme Court term once again featured some major rulings including rulings with direct impacts for North Carolina election maps and the state revenue department's powers joining us with insight on these cases and other important developments of the nation's highest court is Ilya Shapiro.

He is director of the Robert a Leavy Center for Constitutional studies at the libertarian Cato Institute, one of the big rulings nationally and of course North Carolina applications as well had to deal with partisan gerrymandering. What did you think that 54 rolling right so the court said that were to stay out federal courts are going to stay out of fights over use of partisan reasons to draw state district lines so that if you have a problem with you here North Carolina Republicans in Maryland.

The companion state. It was Democrats giving the shaft to the opposing party. Your remedy is under the state constitution or politically about the guys out in the state constitution, things like that they are not to go to federal court. I think that's right. I don't think the Constitution says that you can use a little bit of political gamesmanship but not too much. That's not really a constitutional line to be drawn. And so, though the courts correct to find this issue what they called nonjusticiable is fairly clear that this shuts the door slowly.

Another big case with North Carolina applications.

Maybe not on the national level but certainly for folks here is a case dealing with our state revenue department, hoping to tax a trust, and the Supreme Court said you can't do it right is a trust set up in New York State, but certain beneficiaries or potential beneficiaries were resident in North Carolina.

They hadn't received the money yet more they'd received some but no guarantee that I'll get any in the future, but the department revenue still wanted to tax this out-of-state trust. The court said no you can't do that you can tax the income coming in for the beneficiaries that live here because there that's part of their income tax but saw some out-of-state trust that is unclear whether they're going to be sending money to the beneficiaries now or in future.

That's not enough a basis for overtaxing that the institution sounds like the type of ruling you think would be the right one to make. I think that's right that respects federalism. You can have states just milk willy-nilly taxing out-of-state institutions among the other big rulings coming from the Supreme Court was one that had to deal with the citizenship question on the U.S. Census still spell that what the Commerce Department wanted to add to the decennial census coming up in 2020. The question about you. Are you a citizen happy citizen your household not ask about what you're in the country legally or illegally. There's a debate among social scientists about whether this would decrease the response rate because some people might be fearful even if they're in the country legally might be fearful of answering the question to see if no that would decrease their benefits or the prosecutor or who knows what the court basically said that may be the executive has the power to probably the executive has the power to add this type of question with the need to prove provide an adequate reason in here. Sec. Wilbur Ross is reason that I will be to help the Justice Department force voting rights doesn't pass the smell test. There a lot of other interesting rulings, but you also wanted to point out one that has to do with the administrative state there's there's a couple of this is a theme that's growing in our politics and our jurisprudence in an academic and political discourse about the growth of the administrative state, meaning executive agencies.

Whether it's the EPA or the Department of Labor. All of these executive agencies that effectively rule our lives, doesn't pass much legislation at all anymore so it's rule by regulation from these agencies and there's pushback about judges deferring too much to the agencies in their determination so there is an important ruling case called Kaiser K ISO R that was a challenging run-of-the-mill case involving veterans benefits where the Veterans Affairs ministration just changed the rotation of a particular word in a previous a regulation to deny benefits to this this veteran and how much should courts defer to that. Just change of interpretation, without more, the court didn't overturn the deference doctrine called our AU ER, but the joke as they reduce the hour difference to minute difference that is at some of the courts need to scrutinize whether the agency really is applying expertise, scientific, economic, whatever, and I whether there actually is ambiguity in that regulation that can be reinterpreted.

No just willy-nilly policy change. You can do that but you have to go through full official rulemaking, not just you know a change of mind to going to court and and and do that so watch this space. If the lower courts in future are still deferring to the agency's too much of the agencies are still all-powerful and doing whatever they want, five, 10 years down the road he could see a further challenge and maybe then the court will be more receptive to overturning the doctrine altogether. Newest Justice Brett Cavanagh what impact is he had. While every time there's a new justice. It makes for a new court is different dynamic. Even if you're replacing even more successfully a very similar but still there interpersonal relationships voting patterns influence is different. Cavanagh were still trying to figure them out. Surprisingly, he was the justice most often in the majority this term. We talked about John Roberts truly being the Robert Cornell Kennedy gone.

Roberts was second to Kevin on her being in the majority. Now that might settle down and this was an unusual term in many ways. Not too many blockbusters. The census and gerrymandering side, but interestingly, Cavanagh agreed as much with Justice Kagan and Justice Breyer as would just discourse which his fellow Trump nominees fellow Republican president nominee is fellow co-clerk.

The clerk for Justice Kennedy together. You know so so watch this space is very fluid court that it'll take a while to really settle in, but certainly not the radical right term that that some were fearing or expecting.

Based now with that with five so-called conservative Republican appointees on the court.

You mentioned Roberts now with this new court.

What is the chief justice's role. Some people thought well perhaps he's now to become the swing vote that Anthony Kennedy was that we seen that while he's not swing in the sense that he is truly a moderate who could go either way and he agonizes in hand rings it's more that he views himself as the protector of the institutional integrity and reputation of the court trying to forge compromises being very restrained and minimalist, deciding not to decide as much as possible trends that you have seen, either coming to the fore this year or that you're going to be looking for in the next term. Well, it's what we've been talking about these voting patterns agreement rates I'm looking to see Justice Kagan Justice Breyer with John Roberts and possibly Cavanagh trying to forge a center pragmatic course not to move too far too fast in any direction. How will that play out.

Justice Cavanaugh know there as he settles in.

As we get further from his bruising confirmation battle will he you know will you be closer to Gorsuch and Thomas will be closer to Roberts his own thing.

The 5 to 4 decisions. This term there were 20 of them. Of the 67 cases. Eight of those 20 were the conservative five over the liberal for so-called another eight were the four liberals +1 of the conservatives. Four of those were just discourse, which in criminal procedure cases. Not surprising. By the way, this is same way. Scalia was in these protections for criminal defendants, and four were work on a paradox.

We will see how those how those alignments continue next term is gonna be a much higher profile would already have Dr. whether present time can rescind the executive dream act, as it were, whether title VII of the Civil Rights Act probe prohibition on discrimination based on sex in employment. I whether that applies to sexual orientation and gender identity, textual's case. What do the words of the statute mean but it's going to be blown up to be a big deal. School choice case out of Montana. The US Supreme Court will now take up whether Blaine amendments themselves violate equal protection and discriminate against religious believers. All of those issues will be followed very closely by the man you just been listening to. He is Ilya Shapiro, director of the Robert a Leavy Center for Constitutional studies at the libertarian Cato Institute.

Thank so much for doing a lot more on Carolina Gen. radio just if you love freedom we got great news to share with you now. You can find the latest news, views, and research from conservative groups across North Carolina all in one place North Carolina conservative.com it's one stop shopping. North Carolina's freedom movement@northcarolinaconservative.com. You'll find links to John Locke foundation blogs on the days news Carolina journal.com reporting and quick takes Carolina journal radio interviews TV interviews featuring CJ reporters and Locke foundation analysts, opinion pieces and reports on higher education James G.

Martin Center for academic renewal, commentary and polling data from the scimitar's Institute and news and views from the North Carolina family policy Council. That's right, all in one place North Carolina conservative.com that's North Carolina spelled out conservative.com North Carolina conservative.com. Try it today. North Carolina is changing not just day-to-day but outward to our minute to minute and 2nd to 2nd, how can you keep up with the changes, especially the ones that affect you, your family, your home, your job, make the John Locke foundation and Carolina journal part of your social media diet on Facebook like the John Locke foundation like Carolina. Journal follow us on Twitter at John Locke in C and at Carolina journal news, insights and analysis you'll find nowhere else.

Thanks to the experts at the John Locke foundation and thanks to the first-class investigative reporting of Carolina journal. Don't wait for the morning newspaper. Don't wait for the evening news if it's happening now it's happening here the John Locke foundation and Carolina journal. Have you covered with up to the second information like us on Facebook the John Locke foundation and Carolina journal follow us on Twitter at John Locke in C and at Carolina journal. Who knew you could shop and invest in freedom at the same time it is true online shopping is now a great way to support the John Locke foundation just shop using the Amazon smile program and designate the John Mott foundation to receive a portion of your purchase amount that's right you shop Amazon donates money to pass the John Locke foundation. Here's how long. Time to smile.amazon.com Amazon smile is the same Amazon you know same products same prices.

But here's what's better design donates 0.5% of the price of your eligible Amazon smile purchases to the John Locke foundation to try it. Be sure to designate us as the nonprofit you want to support. It's that easy. So now not only will you enjoy what you buy.

You also support freedom.

Don't forget log on to smile.amazon.com today, something nice and help defend freedom, help support the John Mott foundation will go back to Carolina journal radio I Mitch coca state lawmakers hit a snag this year when they attempted to approve a resolution it was designed to support Pres. trumps United States, Mexico, Canada trade agreement Republican representative Jimmy Dixon pushed the measure in the statehouse is a 21st-century standard agreement that modernizes the 25-year-old North American Free Trade Agreement agreement with American within this agreement. Rules for vehicles must be built at least 75% of the parts made in North America in order to qualify for the other zero tariffs and increases our agriculture markets. There's other provisions of the think is good. I would appreciate your yes vote on this agreement. Some Republicans objected representative Jeffrey Elmore of Wilkes County explained in good conscious this really have a problem celebrating the NAFTA agreement. My area was annihilating by NAFTA. Once that was passed within three months. My first textile factory was shut down in every three months. After that I continue to draw my area one time had two largest manufacturing plants in the world sitting side by side they produce mirrors for the furniture industry. They dropped my furniture factories dropped all these factories using natural resources from our area to produce and A volatile economy for my area. NAFTA legislation change the economy of my area, even up to today. We have a generation of people that were lost understand free trade is important to understand that free trade help certain sectors, but I love the idea of fair trade where we can see all sectors of our economy. Successful another Republican, Keith Kidwell also objected to saying anything good about the old NAFTA trade deal very large supporter of our president and his newly penned deal replaces NAFTA.

With that said, I agree with my friend represent no more.

This resolution sings the praises of the bill the cost of 79th district over 5000 jobs just a couple of my thought of off the top my head very quickly. Little Hamilton Beach for thousand jobs body products 800 fountain powerboat to 75 national spending 2000 jobs. I could go on, I can't support a bill that's that's an area resolution sings the praises of arguably one of the worst trade deals we ever made in this country. After hearing the objections. The statehouse sent the proposed resolution back to committee will return with more Carolina journal radio where doubling down on freedom at Carolina journal radio were proud to bring you stories that impact your life and your wallet. And now get twice as much freedom when you also listen to our podcast headlock available on iTunes and@johnlocke.org/podcast headlock is a little bit different. It's a no holds barred discussion that challenges softheaded ideas from the left and the right, like Carolina journal radio headlock is smart and timely but with headlock you'll hear more about the culture wars get some more humor as well. We guarantee great information and a good time to double down with S.

Listen to Carolina journal radio each week and listen to headlock to remember, you can listen to headlock@johnlocke.org/podcast or subscriber download each week iTunes Carolina journal radio and headlock just what you need to stay informed and stay entertained both brought to you in the name of freedom by the John Locke foundation will connect Carolina journal radio I Mitch coca Bill dubbed the second chance act is getting some support across North Carolina's political spectrum. Republican Sen. Danny Britt recently promoted this bill has been worked on a lot a miniature golf course conference plies as well as other organizations sums for this bill include American conservative Union for just a second chance alliance Americans for prosperity, Coke industries North Carolina justice center Ronald Crom community success initiative NAACP as well as conference plies all the groups came together after the bill passed out of the Senate 44 zero.

This bill doesn't automatically sponge formal charges were dismissed or disposed of by a not guilty after July 1, 2020, allows individuals to petition for expunction of all nonviolent misdemeanor convictions. After seven years of good behavior from records not available to the public but expunge dismissals and convictions can still be assessed by dish attorneys and considered by courts for sentencing of her. If a person re-offense. Also one change the original Senate versus those clarify that for status offenses.

If you have felonies expunged those those failing to still be talent for status offenses well such as habitual felon in possession far boffo. On the other side of the partisan divide Democratic Sen. Floyd McKissick supports the expansion of criminal expungement options. This automatic expunction provision is very important, very significant. Back in 2015 ahead of bill that automating expunction for those people were were later it was discovered as a result of identity fraud or mistaken identity.

Those charges were improperly dropped, made and it dismissed those and allow for mega spunk in those characters. This makes it available for eating characters were somebody is been found not guilty over there dismissed it could impact probably hundred 52,000 people year to very significant provision is something were to recidivate or go out there commit offenses in the future.

There is a portal for DBAs to go back and look and see what characters had been exploring so that he could take into account in sentencing at some point in the future.

State lawmakers debated the second chance act they heard support from outside groups, Mark Holden of Coke industries and Americans for prosperity explained why those two groups endorse the idea we have a vision for what he criminal justice system should look like. It's all the public safety equal rights and ultimately second chances because people get second chances and got another chance after they've made a mistake get on with their lives are less likely to recidivate less likely to go to prison are more likely to be more to him to get a good job and to be a positive member of their society. So there has to be a balance in all of this reality is one of three people in this country have some type of criminal record. Select as many people criminal records have a college degree and those criminal records sometimes keep them from getting any type of job then leads to people going back to prison and doing the wrong thing. So what we want to see are more bills like this disability is great and has the right balance is going to give people a second chance people get a second chance and get a job and support their family support their communities that are proved to be more Dr. members of society. Studies show that people who get their records expunged and get a job.

Their wages go up, and they do not go back to prison. I don't go back to those old ways. That's all about public safety and it's all about justice in our criminal justice system. We do need to hold people accountable, but we should not prevent them from doing great things in the future and one of my favorite sayings is that man should never place a. God's place, because people can do great things in the second chance. Then David is district attorney for New Hanover and Pender counties. He testified about his support for the second chance act. We work with a broad-based coalition of folks from both parties and from people across the aisle from Austin defense attorney ranks to make sure that this was something that struck that balance this a very careful balance between personal responsibility and accountability.

On one hand and offering mercy and a clean slate. On the other. If one of these individuals re-offense the past will come back and be used again in a court of law, but it also removes a scarlet letter no longer applies when someone has demonstrated over many years that they have learned from their mistakes. So I said this is about public safety to us and giving people a path forward who would pay their debt to society increases public safety.

We have learned that there are three inalienable rights that we talk about in our Declaration of Independence and to protect life and secure the blessings of liberty. We can't forget about The Pursuit of Happyness. These felonies these misdemeanors that people have greatly impacted.

As we all know, ability to get housing higher education get into our military and job prospects are greatly exempt 40% future earning potential loss on just one nonviolent felony conviction. So what is this going to do this is going to remain in place the opportunity for people to apply for those expungement after they have been convicted of nonviolent felonies and misdemeanors. So in that sense, it expands to some degree their eligibility. But more than anything. What I'm excited about with this villain. I know many other dealers are to ones like me who hold expungement clinics in our district, 99% of the people who are eligible never apply in many of them were talking about dismissed cases not guilty cases. Ones that remain on your record and a lot of people don't know what they just get the rejection letters.

This will help the administrative office of courts in charge of getting computer technology behind this effort to help hundreds of thousands of people get those automatically expunged by operation of the computer rather than the costly hoops of jumping through it in a courtroom.

Jason Soper of the North Carolina chamber chimed in, giving members of our community that may have made a mistake with demonstrated the ability to reenter society and to pursue gainful employment.

It is crucial to North Carolina's fiber lawmakers also have heard from offenders Lynn Burke of the second chance alliance told her story 30 years ago I wrote bad checks falls, pretense, and it way for me to be able to take care my children.

After my mother that I was really young at the time and I end up serving two years in the women's prison. Luckily I got my children back.

A lot of women don't get their children back and down.

But when I didn't get home and got my children back. Had a really hard time trying to find a job. I would go to different places and try to apply the course actually get denied based on my family convictions so I would try to go get a job someplace else and I wouldn't tell him about my convictions and I would go to work anyway. Within a couple months they would find out and I would get fired. Luckily I started my own business.

That was the only way to find a job. I started leaving flowers and dad that worked really well for me and tell all my children graduate from high school and he graduated from college and when I was at. I realize that maybe I could no graduate and go to go to school as well.

Like Beatty I graduated from NC State and I went to and graduated from North Carolina Central University school of Law.

I am licensed to practice in DC but not North Carolina. And that's mostly based on my criminal record and that I think is very important that people can get a chance and know that one day their life would be different if they would have to always have to clean bathroom so I do things that other people would want to do they think they would know after 10 years or seven years that they can go do something else that they can have dreams and so I just hope that you will consider this law is really important, but listening to discussion of the second chance act expands options for criminal, expungement will return with more Carolina journal radio in a moment really influence you either have it or you don't and at the John Mott foundation we have it, you'll find our guiding principles in many of the freedom forward reforms of the past decade here in North Carolina. So while others talk or complain or name call. We provide research solutions and hope our team analyzes the pressing issues of the day jobs, healthcare, education, and more. When you look for effective ways to give you more freedom, more options, more control over your life. Our goal is to transform North Carolina into a growing, thriving economic powerhouse, the envy of every other state. Our research is how policymakers make decisions that ensure you keep more of what you are.

Expand your choice of schools for your kids. Widen your job opportunities improve your access to doctors. The recipe for stability and a bright future for truth for freedom for the future of North Carolina.

We are the John Locke foundation. Welcome back to Carolina journal radio Donna Martines jobs jobs and more jobs we'd all like for North Carolina to send more of them. But the debate comes in how best to attract industry to our state and then how to keep companies here once they relocate to recent developments shine a light on two different policy choices impacting jobs and economic growth. John Sanders is the director of regulatory studies for the John Mott foundation. He's been following both of the stories really carefully writing a lot about them joins us now with an update, welcome back to the shelf stuff. Let's talk first about the film industry.

We know that particularly over in the coastal part of the state.

They back to some productions going on and they often like to tout the fact that they that moviemakers and net television commercial makers in town. That's all well and good but there is some a tax break that goes along with that give us an update on what North Carolina does. In order to try and attract television and film to the state. Currently, we've got a grant programs To $31 million and what we are trying to do with that is is incentivize film productions suit to bring TV shows or movies it's come to the state and set up shop and if they hit the minimum spin level which TV shows and movies will will most likely do than they will reimburse them with grants of 25% of their spin such a pretty good deal if they come here because they essentially get what what I would as a layperson just call a rebate of sorts right so it is really a a positive step, though John towards economic growth.

I mean if were going to do that for the film industry and nothing.

It's the film industry. That's terrific but what about other industries.

One, that's the thing that researchers are finding if we are trying to grow the film industry and were not going to worry about the rest the states economy, then the grant programs.

Not a bad idea if we are doing this because we think it's going to be good for the overall economy.

You know, we incentivize film productions then that's going to drive tourism that's going to incentivize her or drive local industries to help out blah blah that's the thinking, but that doesn't pan out in the research and what we'd see in research consistently across states, not just North Carolina is that it benefits the film production companies, but not states economy overall and recently John you were out writing once again about another new study that came out looking at film incentives give us a sense of what that study found. It's a brand-new study from Western Carolina University's done by an economist from Georgia, JC Bradberry and it looked at North Carolina's incentive and essentially said like all the other incentives it's not helping the states economy. If anything it's making things worse. How is it possible that it would make things worse because it's removing certain amount of money from other productive activities and putting it to something that politicians want to do, but that people making their own choices with their own with their own resources would probably not choose and because of that it is taking away the other productive activities and that sort of thing is not measured when you think about these EU focus on where the money is going to don't think about where it's coming from and this is a really interesting policy choice in North Carolina. I think John because you have support for this across political lines that Democrats and Republicans support this kind of thing.

Not all but across political lines. So what is it that those elected officials. Those policymakers who are choosing to engage to vote for these types of policies and incentives.

What is it that you would say to them to help them to have a clearer view of the economics of this order try to do is peel back the rest of the assumption it starts from when the movie when the money is transferred and then you see all well it's having this economic impact here, but we don't look at what we've done, we pulled the money away from other productive activities and the same sorts of assumptions apply, and that those monies would have other uses would have secondary uses and in growth economies and all these other ways. So I try to explain how those things work.

I can imagine if you are a leader in AM different industry that is out there trying to sell its products hire people expand etc. you probably scratching your head and saying hey why film and television and not me Mr. furniture maker. For example, that's a very good point to the one we do it that way. We are telling the others. The other industries all you guys are in is important we really we really like this area, we like to see growth over here and where were just going to ignore you, John. You've also been following a really interesting kind of behind-the-scenes type a story having to do with another policy issue that directly affects economic growth and that has to do with all of the rules and regulations that are in place that in some cases are so overly burdensome us as you've written about a lot that it really stifles on job creation and economic growth, but North Carolina for a couple years now has been on a track for reviewing a lot of these rules and deciding should we have this rule or should we not give us an update on that process, just the processes sunset with periodic review periodic review of rules and I think is one of the best regulatory reforms that the state has done in the last few years. Essentially what it does is every 10 years and says let's review a regulation that is been promulgated by state agencies to see if it still necessary the way it was originally set up. There are three different categories either. It's considered unnecessary. In which case is automatically repealed or it's considered necessary and under necessary, either with or without substantive public input so the agency would say we think is necessary to put out for for public comment if it receives no public comment.

It would be automatically react if it would receive some public comment, then it would have to be re-adopted as if it were so would be subject to new scrutiny. This legislature just passed a law that gets rid of that distinction. So now either role is unnecessary and automatically repealed or necessary, in which case it's automatically scrutinized again as if it were a new role and John, you have written about this for a number of years and kudos to you because you really focused on this and help them to inform and educate our state legislators on exactly this process and the economic impact of too many rules and regulations and all that seem to be feeling pretty good about this I do in the process is been working really well. I like to see more of him always know I would always like to see more but so far they reviewed almost 20,000 rules and they removed one out of every 10 that they reviewed so I think that's of this, a strong result.

Yet it is indeed the interesting thing about this and and why it's so important that time someone like you keep writing about this and keeping this issue before policymakers is that it's easy for people's eyes to glaze over and say rules and regulations. Who cares. That's just paperwork but help us understand John about how this really does affect economic growth, rules and regulations will paperwork like you mentioned. That's time most of the industries most the companies North Carolina are small businesses and most small businesses cannot afford people to pay attention to people to be dedicated to compliance to the time and the drudgery of knowing and filling out all the papers and knowing what they're supposed to do so. It's a significant cost, especially the small business and it's not something that shows up on the papers is not something that shows up in the official numbers of income, but time is money is definitely a cost in in some ways a real drag on business's operations. That person is spending time in all the paperwork and the rules and compliance isn't spending time helping to develop new customers I products. I don't have activities exactly while all of this is analyzed and written about regularly by our guest John Sanders. He is director of regulatory studies for John Mott foundation, the time we have for the program this week. Thank you for listening on behalf of microburst Muskoka Donna Martinez hope you'll join us again next week for another edition of Carolina journal radio Carolina journal radio is a program of the John Locke foundation to learn more about the John Locke foundation donations that support programs like Carolina journal radio send email to development John Locke done call 1866 JL left info 166-553-4636 Carolina journal radio is the John line foundation airline is maintaining Carolina broadcasting system, Inc. all opinions expressed on this program and are selling those did not merely reflect the organization. For more information about the show. Other programs and services of the foundation.

John Locke toll-free at 866 JL would like to thank our wonderful radio affiliates across Carolina and our sponsors. Carolina journal radio. Thank you for listening. Please join us again next week