Burke: We are here today to speak with Minority Leader in the North Carolina House of Representatives, Robert Reives. Thank you, Representative Reives for setting aside time for this interview.
When you first came to the North Carolina House 12 years, what surprised you the most about how things worked?
Reives: The most surprising thing was the lack of congeniality. My father, while serving as legislative council for Lieutenant Governor Wicker, did a lot of liaising with the General Assembly. Obviously, there was a different atmosphere with Democrats in control, but there was plenty of interaction between the two parties.
When I first came to the House, several Republicans, who had served in the minority under Democrats, believed strongly in having contact with their Democratic colleagues, and Democrats had reached out to them. In fact, Joe Hackney, the last Democratic speaker, had always made sure that Republicans were on bills and things of that sort. So it surprised me when Republican leadership, under Tillis at the time, discouraged bipartisan interaction.
Several Republicans told me that Tillis told members of his majority party that they should not go to lunch or dinner with Democrats and warned them that if they were seen fraternizing, there would be consequences within their caucus. And there were. During my first term in the House, Robert Brawley, Republican representative from Mecklenburg for seventeen years, was kicked out of the caucus. He had gone against Tillis on a particular bill, and so they put him out their caucus. I was surprised to see how strict they were in their caucus discipline.
When I first came to the House, I knew that fracking was a politically polarized issue, so I picked another important issue to work on—broadband. It made sense that we might be able to find bipartisan ground on that issue, an easy lift I thought.
My wife’s family lives in Goldston, and we eventually moved there. I knew at the time that as soon as you hit the Chatham County line and you got up through Gulf into Goldston that your signal would go out because there was no viable internet service at all.
I thought that would be something we could all agree on. One of the first constituent meetings I had was with a group in a nice neighborhood. The problem was that they couldn’t get Spectrum to hook them up. Spectrum was going to charge each of them about $21,000 just for getting the infrastructure in place. I remember there was a pediatric surgeon who lived there. He complained that anywhere else he had admitting privileges, he could perform pre-op and post-op consultations and prescribe online. He couldn’t do that with the hospital in Siler City. The injured child had to wait for him to make the one-hour drive from his home.
The problem was that the government had shut down all avenues that local jurisdictions could take to correct the problem themselves. Chatham had money in a fund set aside to try to help with the infrastructure. After Wilson, NC set down fiber optic cable and delivered cheaper and faster internet access to their residents in 2008, broadband providers lobbied heavily till the Republican controlled General Assembly passed laws prohibiting such solutions in other areas of the state. In a sense, they were saying, we are not going to service those people, but in case we opt to someday, we don’t want cities and towns getting involved. We want to decide who gets the business.
I only got real broadband in Goldstone for the first time a couple of years ago.
Therefore, the government, and its preference for major providers over local solutions simply protracted the spread of broadband throughout our state. And during the Pandemic, it set back all those children during who didn’t have access to education. Only after COVID, with the Biden infrastructure bill, did this needlessly protracted problem get solved. Ironically, those who took credit for the influx of money for broadband expansion were our Republican federal representatives and senators who voted against the bill.
Burke: When did that divide-and-conquer mentality start to thaw in the General Assembly?
Reives: It didn’t. We’re still in that spot now. Every freshman class comes in, and freshmen Republicans and freshmen Democrats will always plan something together. They’ll have a kumbaya moment. Everybody will say, “Okay, we’re going to be different, but soon Democrats are just hanging out with fellow Democrats; Republicans just hanging with Republicans. The things that would make us more functional as a body just don’t happen. There’s just too much polarization.
This has, in fact, been one of the least productive years in our history. All our Republican controlled General Assembly did was just pass a bunch of culture war bills. We didn’t do anything functional. There’s nothing.
We couldn’t even pass a Medicaid rebate bill. On the other hand, I think that the new speaker of the House has done more than any of the speakers I’ve worked with.
Burke: To what extent will Phil Berger’s loss in the primary change things?
Reives: Because whoever takes over for him as Senate leader will likely never have served in a minority, it could become worse. Only those who have served in the minority recognize how they were treated, and are, therefore, more likely to collaborate. Those who have always been in the majority only know how to run stuff down everybody’s throat. They have never had to appease anybody.
This reality, together with a Republican leadership that has grown smaller and that now controls so much more, will tighten the reins of power. This leadership will likely further weaken the legislature’s committee process and thus our state’s democracy. I can tell you of three cycles at least when the budget was pretty much written by about five or six people. That’s not representative democracy!
In politics today, you have the group of those who either work every day or have had to work every day at some point. And then you have the folks who have never had to really work. They’ve never had to worry about money. The members of this latter group make up the closest thing to an American aristocracy.
Burke: It sounds like you are describing serious class differences.
Reives: There are serious class differences, but what the Republicans, who represent the elites, have decided is that the best way to govern is to keep Americans divided and fighting. They have done this for 45, 50 years.
But you’ll notice that they never speak openly about the super rich, on the one hand, and the rest of us, on the other, or about the widening income gap in our nation. Instead, they incite differences about everything else: religion, race, gender and sexuality. In other words, they have created a scarcity model. Among Republicans now, there are some men who believe that if women are given more rights, the rights of men will be threatened. Or if the rights of Black people are expanded, the rights of Whites will decrease. Or if we allow legal forms to be written in Spanish, then English won’t matter.
And that’s not true. What happens and what has always happened in our country is that everybody just comes together. We work it out, we figure it out and keep on going. We are not the ones who take from each other.
Increasingly, social media is often fueling our resentments. Mark Zuckerberg broke it wide open for everybody. He justified such manipulation because it boosts his profits. The algorithms’ clever programmers enhance prejudices, broaden grievances, and use sensationalism, sometimes lies, to keep us engaged. They keep people at each other’s throats in the endless feud at the heart of contemporary politics today.
That’s the Republican divisive political model. Democrats have a different political model, one that’s not a zero-sum game. Hey, if I reach out to help you, that doesn’t take away from me. Rather, it’s just something I should do.
That being said, it is really hard to get people on the same page. Even when alliances across party lines make sense, obstacles can still prevent them. Take, for example, public safety. Republicans in the General Assembly have a lot of sheriffs who serve on their side. Democrats have several who have been prosecutors. We ought to be naturally aligned but are not because of our parties.
This is crazy. I care about safer neighborhoods probably as much as anybody. I’m hoping that eventually we can get back to a little more congeniality in which we know more about each other, because it’s hard to demonize a person that you know.
Burke: What methods have you tried to break down some of this partisanship, to build some bridges?
Reives: I’ve learned never to go after anybody personally. It’s hard sometimes. You sometimes encounter someone or a member of their staff who is really mean, really nasty, and they want to go after you, but you have to show restraint.
I am proud that nobody can point to a debate in my 12 years when I’ve gone after somebody personally, when I have denigrated someone’s feelings about a subject. If we disagree, we disagree. That doesn’t mean that you’re wrong, and I’m right. Just means that we disagree.
My goal is to support bills that help the most people and do the least amount of harm. That’s how I analyze a bill. For example, when I look at tax bill that proposes a billion dollar tax cut, I’m going to want that billion dollar cut to work its way up the ladder rather than down.
Take Jeff Bezos. Someone who can pay $58 million for a wedding probably should pay a few more dollars in taxes. Bezos has had at least one year in which he paid less in taxes than I did. That’s a ridiculous tax system. And my thing is, if you’re going to take that tax revenue away, give the break to people who need the break.
I’ve tried not to demonize people, but sadly, that practice can happen even in our own Democratic Party. Take a recent primary for a federal seat in the House. Suddenly Valerie Foushee is too old and doesn’t fight. She was the first black woman on the Board of Education, the first black female chair of the county commission, the first black female to ever serve in the house from Chatham. You don’t think she’s been through any fights? To think otherwise is insane to me.
Since Trump’s first campaign for president, political discourse has become more course, more infused with personal attacks and attacks on whole groups rather than substantive debates about policy. I think women have been under attack as much as minority groups. Women encompass all minority groups. And you’ve got people who, honest to God, believe that women should only go so far.
There are people who would not vote for Kamala, would not vote for Hillary simply because they are women. You see this all the time in business. It still amazes me how few women are partners in larger law firms. I recently met a maxillofacial surgeon who was talking about the fact that at this time, only 0.1% of those who perform her kind of surgery are women, 0.1%!
Although we like to think of all Americans as equal, we also need to acknowledge that some, like the woman who performs surgery on people’s jaws, might have had a harder path to navigate than others.
I talk a lot about the people who have had to deal with consequences in their lives versus those who have had much handed to them. You can tell the difference. The latter can be the bull in China shop, knock everything down and not have to clean up. Remember all the DOGE destruction. And then there are people who have had to deal with the consequences of their actions. They handle things differently. If you’ve had consequences in your life, you understand that the decisions you make in government are real decisions with real consequences in the lives of those you represent.
And in thinking about those we represent, we must not only respect those whose faith we share but also those who hold other beliefs. Republican leaders have tried to co-opt Christianity, and in so doing, they fail to see that other faiths are also founded on community, sacrifice, discipline, and regard for others. Ours should not be a government to judge the beliefs of others or to separate those who believe as we do from those who do not.
Let me make clear that I am not talking about voters who identify themselves as Republicans. I am talking about those Republican leaders in power now at various levels of government.
Burke: How much is the vitriol in political discourse and the erosion of civility a tone set at the top?
Reives: The problem at the top is only emblematic of the disease that works its way up. When you see people serving on city councils who don’t believe in institutions, who don’t believe in helping those less fortunate, who don’t believe in the core principles of government, that’s the time to take them out. Their aim is to blow up the system. You must get them out early. I’ve seen more on the Republican side in my career than I have on the Democratic side.
You can see this in North Carolina when Republicans gained control of the General Assembly. They stopped having judges who wanted to be fair in favor of judges who would just do what the Republican leadership said.
What I love about the candidates we recruited this year is that I feel comfortable that they are good representatives. Are we aligned everywhere? No. But I am comfortable that all will take their obligation seriously.
Republicans have torn down the Democratic brand for years. And we have allowed it. It has become tough to be a Democrat. This is not reflective of the people who represent the brand. We must correct that. We must be better at defining what we stand for.
We have been very naïve about the influence of wealth and the media, especially social media. Those things are real. That’s why we have the Citizens United decision. Nothing good comes out of a bunch of money being in anything.
The biggest problem isn’t a $25 dinner. The biggest problem is a group that spends $2 million on the candidate, and that candidate doesn’t even know who they are.
I tell people all the time, if you took the excessive money out of politics, you took away our ability to draw our own districts, then you’d fix your government immediately because it changes the people who then go into office, and you have much more of a voice.
Burke: You have mentioned a Democratic “brand.” Has the Democratic Party become the party of the more educated, more aloof, and more liberal? Has the party lost touch with the heart of the country, with its daily workers?
Reives: I think what happened is that we became afraid to fight for the things that we care about on a larger scale. As it became less popular in the country for us to talk about helping people, our values became less visible.
We often refer to the Democratic Party as a “Big Tent.” Ideally, the Democratic Party illustrates the founders’ intentions in 1776 when they decided that our national motto would be “e pluribus unum (out of many, one). Democrats must stop trying to explain everything and state in simple terms what they stand for: that government can be made to work for all, that the growing chasm between the wealthy and those struggling to provide for their families must be addressed, that the rule of law applies equally to all, that corruption must be eliminated even at the top, and that limiting the rights of one group threatens our democracy.
Burke: Are Democrats losing their working class base?
Reives: Absolutely. Because again, we’re so afraid to reach out to workers and to listen to their concerns. The hardest thing I think I’ve done in my 12 years in office is to convince some who are running for office to listen. We do a great job of telling people what we think is good for them. We rarely ask them what they think is good for them.
Take my grandmother for example. For 15 year I was her only grandchild. She did everything for me, and I loved her dearly. She used to dip this nicotine product called snuff, and I remember when they were telling her, “You need to stop dipping snuff.” And she responds, “I’ve been dipping snuff since I was three, so thank you, but no, thank you.” We could have been a family that just shamed her. We could have pushed her, telling her “This isn’t good.” “You’re a bad influence.” Or we could have been a family who allowed her some choice. She knew what made her happy and what worked for her. She lived till 85, never had cancer or anything.
I only mention this example to illustrate a Democratic tendency to point out the little grievances rather than to accentuate the important things we stand for. After all, we’re on the side of the angels when it comes to working people. We believe that government can address their needs and ensure justice for them.
If you’re making $400,000 a year, $40,000 a year, or $4,000 a year, you ALL deserve a government that will work for you and improve community, work to ensure your safety, protect your rights, and when needed, extend a safety net to you.
Some of our Republican colleagues, are, themselves, members of the elite who don’t welcome the class and cultural variety that defines the Democratic Party. I find that there is nothing better in this world than getting to see other people who are so different from you. Nothing. That’s what is the greatest thing about Chatham County. I can go through Chatham County, and I’ve got just as good a chance of running into somebody from Siler City as from Pittsboro. That is cool. Democrats see that as rejuvenating, as American, whereas Republicans often view such diversity as threatening, something that might change a way of life they seek to preserve and a hold on power they strive to maintain.
That’s why they want to have the history taught in a certain way, as a glorious story that celebrates their nobility and accomplishments, one that glosses over the harsh lessons that history can teach. That’s why they want to have certain cultures not be represented.
Democrats, on the other hand, realize that the nostalgic wish to return to an America that was somehow pure and right is a delusion. Democratics believe that community can only be formed when we appreciate and accept differences, when we listen to the needs of all, and when we extend a hand to those in need. Democrats believe that government, done well, is in the interest of all.
Burke: How do you take something like that and turn it into action?
Reives: You do what Roy Cooper did with Medicaid expansion. He stopped telling people you need to do it ’cause it’s the right thing. He went to hotel owners and said, “This is why it’s important to you. This is how it helps you.” Then he had this huge coalition of people who recognized Medicaid’s importance.
Burke: But don’t your Republican colleagues care about their voters in rural districts who are going to suffer the most when their local hospitals close?
Reives: I will never say they don’t care, but if they are given misinformation constantly, then it makes it harder for them to make the decisions that would best serve their constituents. If you live in a bubble and you don’t open yourself up to hear these different viewpoints, I think it can lead to decisions that may not have the effect that you think they’re going to have.
It’s also the money. And I’m not speaking as somebody who falls prey to it, but if it becomes about staying in office, elected people can convince themselves that they can accomplish good things if they just go along with others. At some point, however, all of us as elected officials must have some core principles which we stand for, regardless of the pressure to conform.
Money makes a big difference. Democratic folks are getting elected at the end of the day independently, because, we don’t have a bunch of billionaires just dropping by with $10 million to help run our race. I have known a couple of billionaires in the state who have just said, “You know what? I’m going to make sure Republicans get elected.” So they literally finance, 65, 70 races.
Is it worth the trade off if the person who’s helping me get that money says, “In that case, you must vote against Medicaid expansion. For me, that’s easy. For those who accept those transactional offers, they must justify, at least to themselves, the exchange of a vote for the campaign funding. Short term pain, long term gain.
Medicaid expansion meant something to me because I’ve got an uncle who just got two hip replacements. He was a guy who had been a star athlete, an amazing physical specimen, but later in life he had to pull his leg to walk up a few stairs. You could see how painful it was. Now after the two surgeries, there’s not much in life that makes me happier than seeing something good happen for him. He’s the most thankful and appreciative person I know.
Burke: What would the Democrats do if they were in the majority?
Reives: First, it’s nice to have your party in the executive branch (president or governor), but the power is in the legislature, either in Congress at the federal level or General Assembly at the state level. These forms of government are set up to enact change, unless they willingly forfeit the power that the constitution gives them, as our Republican controlled Congress in Washington has done.
Were Democrats to be in the majority in the NC General Assembly, life would immediately get better if you worked every day. It’s just that simple. Government would function better because state employees would be properly paid, and the trains would run on time. Teachers and Law enforcement would be better paid. That, in turn would lift salaries in the private sector.
Minimum wage in NC is still at $7.25 an hour. It’s crazy right now in Chatham County. If you’re a deputy at the sheriff’s office, you can’t afford to live in the community. That’s one of the things that we would change. The other thing is to have a healthier population, one in which all have access to good healthcare.
I’m not one of those who believes that the only way you make it is with a college degree, a grad degree, or a professional degree. You should have the opportunity to get educated however you want. I’ve got a cousin who did two years in community college. The best thing that happened to him. He’s making more money than me. He’s a great mechanic.
So if we’ve got an educational system that provides opportunity for all, then we can have the best business climate. All within six months of Democrats taking over!
And that attracts better jobs, jobs like the 1800 that Wolf Speed will bring to Siler City, Chatham County. Suddenly, a person with a high school degree has a chance of a $70, $80,000 job out the gate.
Burke: To do all of this, would you raise taxes?
Reives: No, the tax cuts that go into future years, tax cuts that the Republicans put in place, must stop. I think that if you reallocate some monies, there are a lot of things you can do. This school year, the NC voucher program is scheduled to cost taxpayers over $600 million to pay for K-12 private school education. That expenditure is expected to grow to nearly $900 million in the next few years. 86% of the money goes to religious schools with no accountability required to measure student achievement. We could use some of that money to invest in people and in productive structures. Were the state to use the voucher program for another purpose, there’s not a private school in the state that would have to close, but there are public schools now in danger of being closed.
We also need to get infrastructure out to some of these rural areas. I can think of a county right now that could, with infrastructure improvements, land a huge economic development project, which would bring everything up in that county.
Burke: 580,000 children in NC receive nutrition assistance through SNAP, but the Republicans in Washington have cut those benefits. How should the General Assembly respond?
Reives: There is money there to deal with the nutrition issues, and we’re going to have to use it. I recently went to Food Hub, and they were talking about their system. If we put money into their system, we keep more farmland and help more small and mid-sized farmers. By making kids healthier, we make it possible for farmers to have a dependable market.
It is shocking to me how much fluff we have in our budget. So, yes, there’s money we can use to keep kids from going hungry.
Burke: Earlier you mentioned NC’s $7.25/hour minimum wage. How can you improve that?
Reives: We have to do something about minimum wage, and it’s got to be a multi-pronged approach. If we tell somebody in Anson County that they must pay $20 an hour, they are going to tell us that someone will be forced to shut down a small business. At the same time, if I tell somebody in Raleigh that they must pay $15 an hour, they’re going to say, “That’s cool.” But it’s not going to help. It’s not enough. There must be a comprehensive discussion. In the end, I think that the fastest route to building up wages is to work with the private sector to create more jobs with competitive wages.
I’ve just been talking with one of my employees about the public service angle. She says that ECU [Eastern Carolina University] has a wonderful program for dentists. If you’re willing to go out to an underserved county and work there five years, they’ll pay for your schooling. And the reason that’s important is because when they live in one of these areas, they realize that it’s a nice place to live. They establish their business, and they stay. So, these programs benefit both the student by ridding him or her of debt, and they provide a community with a dentist, or a doctor, or a physician’s assistant, or a teacher in a competitive field.
The government has sticks and carrots. We’ve got the ability to penalize people if they don’t do certain things, but we’ve also got ways to incentivize people. How about if I give you a tax cut if you do certain things that invest in our communities?
Burke: So, when are we going to see you run for a position in Washington?
Reives: I wanna see what we can do about North Carolina first because I believe in the bottom up. I’ve got things in mind that I’d love to see us accomplish. I think we’ve got a chance to be in the majority. I believe there’s some things that we could fix at the state level to make us more functional and make us more attractive as a state.
There’s real opportunity in the House. The caucus we will go in with in ‘27 will be a sea change. I like to think that dark times help build character. And by now, we have great character! We understand what can be taken away, and so we’ll cleave a little closer to the good things once we get ’em back.
Burke: Representative Reives, I want to thank you. This has been very interesting.
