We urge NC voters to reject constitutional amendments 

The midterm election is bulging with top-of-the-ticket races that is basically a referendum on the Trump administration of national policy on the economy, military adventurism and common sense.

Below them are a series of constitutional referendums that if approved by North Carolina voters, would enshrine massive tax cuts for the richest residents and corporations, limit property tax levies and require voter ID for absentee and mail-in ballots. We see all three as dangerous overreach that should be rejected.

For starters, if Republican lawmakers are so certain that these ideas are smart policy, it should be codified in state legislation, not the Constitution. Bills passed by the General Assembly and signed by the governor – or by overriding a veto – gives voters an opportunity to hold state government to account. A constitutional amendment is inherently more difficult to undo and leaves no room for local and state government to adapt to changing needs. 

While these amendments are appealing on the surface, further inspection reveals a scheme that will not lower taxes for most North Carolina residents or make casting a ballot easier.

Elections have consequences, and so will these referendums. Although their language is enticing – who wouldn’t like lower taxes? – the reality is these amendments will draw down the tax rate to dangerously low levels while trapping municipalities and state government with fewer avenues to raise revenue. To riff on an old parable, it’s akin to allowing the fox to not only guard the henhouse but raid its contents with few options to compensate for the loss.

Here’s why the amendments should be voted down.

• The income tax amendment lowers the maximum personal and corporate income tax rate from 7% to 3.5% starting next year. Current state law already sets individual tax rate at 3.49% beginning in 2027, but the constitutional amendment blocks the General Assembly from raising either rate in the future without another constitutional amendment. We see this as a cynical attempt to hose working- and middle-class people while creating massive tax breaks for the rich and corporations.

We see no good reason – or common sense, for that matter – for anyone to put extra income in the pockets of the wealthy at everyone else’s expense.

At a time when we can see and feel the impacts of economic challenges, North Carolina can ill afford the loss of tools that would address fiscal emergencies, much less the daily needs of a growing state. From education to roads and responders, we all depend on tax dollars to fund critical programs that benefit the state’s residents.

• The property tax amendment would require limits on how much local governments can increase levies. There’s no specification of limits, but it would pose major impacts on 
Mecklenburg County, where property taxes provide $1.53 billion in fiscal year 2027 revenue – 59% of the total.

Nearly $1 billion, or 38% of Mecklenburg’s budget goes to education and literacy including Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools, Charlotte Mecklenburg Library, and Pre-K initiatives. Property taxes also pay for essentials like health and human services, public safety and parks.

What happens when municipalities face unforeseen needs – or increased costs for services – but unable to raise revenue due to property tax caps? They likely won’t get help from the General Assembly, where Republicans have shown hostility to funding municipal needs. Trump-enthralled Washington will be even less likely to help.

Limiting counties’ ability to raise money that pay for three-quarters of services mandated by state or federal governments will pose serious problems at home.

• The voter identification amendment would require all voters, not only those voting in person, to present photo ID before voting. North Carolina already requires photo identification for in-person voting and requires absentee-by-mail voters to include a copy of a photo ID or complete an exception form. 

Voter ID proponents are still looking for solutions in search of a problem. Federal and state law forbids non-citizens from casting a ballot, and people who aren’t registered to vote obviously can’t participate. This proposed amendment doesn’t do anything to make voting more secure beyond current voter ID laws on the books, so why enshrine redundancy? 

Comments