State News

Perdue seeks more fed funding in D.C. visit

Posted October 5, 2009

— Gov. Beverly Perdue is making a quick trip to Washington in her hunt for federal dollars that could improve the state's jobs picture.

Perdue planned to follow a morning of meetings in Raleigh on Monday with a trip to the nation's capital. She planned to meet with U.S. Commerce Secretary Gary Locke to talk about using federal stimulus money to extend the reach of broadband Internet service to rural areas.

Perdue spokesman David Kochman said she's hoping to position the state to collect more recovery dollars.

Kochman said Perdue will next meet with defense industry executives at a Washington conference, where she will highlight North Carolina's strength and potential for defense businesses.

Perdue has traveled the East Coast in the past week, pressing for federal money and selling North Carolina as a good place to do business.

She spent two days in New York City last week, urging companies to set up shop or expand existing operations in North Carolina.

Then, she pushed the state's case for stimulus dollars at the Democratic Governors Association meeting, part of which President Barack Obama attended. Last Thursday, Kochman she hoped to get stimulus funds to replace the Yadkin River Bridge on Interstate 85.


This story is closed for comments.

Oldest First
View all
  • anti-Hans Oct 6, 2009

    Heard an interesting figure yesterday. New York raised taxes through the roof, and somehow tax revenue has fallen 37%. HOw? If they raise taxes, seems the revenue would also go up. I can't figure this one out.

    Wait, the mind is it. Taxes get raised and businesses close, lay off people etc. and the number of people contributing drops off the table. Those left to pay into the system end up paying more, but that is fair because it's not fair they have more money. The evil rich need to be tazed more to make it fair!

  • rbh330 Oct 5, 2009

    It is not a waste of money for a NC Governor to have face time with DC lawmakers and those who control the pursestrings. It's part of her job.

  • 1carpe Oct 5, 2009

    MakoII I cannot find a government which has ever created wealth (excluding for those in power). I will never be convinced that "providing for the welfare of the people" includes making them so dependent on government hand outs they are no longer usefull citizens. I firmly believe in and practice taking care of those who are truely in need because life has dealt them some bad blows. Those are the people who work their back ends off to pick them selves up. Now for the 6th generation welfare recipients who the government through hand out has been at least partially responsible for taking away their self worth, I have very little sympathy for and hate seeing my tax dollars being wasted on them. Communism and Socialism has shown in every country using it that if everybody "shares" and nobody is rewarded based on output, then output declines and the nation is left trying to cobble together some kind of existance.

  • MakoII Oct 5, 2009


    I mentioned the preamble for it's guidance on what spending is used for. Defense, the general well being of the population, etc. (which I take to mean vaccinations kind of thing)

    Remember, the government can own things in a capitalistic society. It's just the minority owner. Which is still the case.

    I was surprised you didn't mention that the legislative branch has the right to tax, but it's the executive branch that is taxing you for personal income! (a Libertarian argument that has a lot of truth to it, but not worth personally wiggling out of, too risky)

    I am entirely unhappy with the debt. It was waved off by Republicans for years by saying that trickle down would stimulate the economy to outgrow, outpace the debt and it would be easier to pay the debt.

    Currently we are doing some trickle down, but more trickle up than before.

    We'll see if it has merit. If in 5 years all things are recovered well and fine we can say it actually worked.

    Otherwise, BOTH failed!

  • 1carpe Oct 5, 2009

    MakoII you are partially right. I intentionally ignored China because I believe (presently) the tax payers of this county are still footing a majority of the bill. As of 3 minutes ago, US debt held by foreign countries was 3.5+ Trillion, tax revenues almost 10.5 trillion ( Where I disagree with your argument is the person who buys the candy bar does so of his/her own free will. The company who employees me does so of their own free will. That is capitalism, not the government taking more and more and more in taxes to give to more and more and more people who refuse to work. And by the way, talking about semantics, it was Article 8 of the Constitution which empowered the legislature to collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts, and Excises, not the Preamble.

  • MakoII Oct 5, 2009


    That's largely semantics, your argument.

    If you take your argument at face value, then YOU are NOT in fact paying for that money, China is!

    So thank your friend from China for THEIR contribution, right?

    And while your at that line of thought, YOU don't earn anything. It's your employer or your customers that are paying for your salary.

    When you buy a chocolate bar, it's your employer/customer buying it for you.

    Totally semantics.

    The Federal Government is entirely empowered to raise revenue and spend it to do the Preamble of the constitution and anything else Congress desires.

    It's called Capitalism and Federalism.

  • 1carpe Oct 5, 2009

    I really do wish they would quit calling it FEDERAL FUNDING. Fact of the matter is it dollars taken from the approximately 52% of Americans who pay taxes. The Federal Government, like State Government makes and darn sure does not EARN any money. If everybody in this country who works, had to sit down each month and write out individual checks for Fed, State, local taxes, and Social Security and Medicare, plus all of the hidden taxes, I will betcha there would be a huge turn over in DC next year. Just think when Perdue gets more "Federal Funds" she will look you in the eye and look at all the "Federal Money" I got for you (oh yea, if you pay taxes, forget it was your money to start with).

  • MakoII Oct 5, 2009


    Adam Smith called it the "invisible hand" of the market that corrects problem.

    Although last year made clear that this was more an "invisible hatchet"

    Even Greenspan admits this thinking was wrong. That the greed of those overseeing people's money had them defrauding the system.

    Perhaps these economist and CEO's should have to take something like the "Hippocratic Oath" to serve their investors.

    Because they seem to be "serving" their investors a la carte.

  • pbjbeach Oct 5, 2009



  • pbjbeach Oct 5, 2009

    If Governor Dumpling & former governor slealey would be more prudent with the letting of state agency contracts an then add some means of oversight an accountablity to these same contracts an allow for the actual enforecement of these contracts under the contracts provisione that are already entered into these state contracts then an only then would the taxpayers of this state be receiving real leadership from these governors an former governors an until such time as these ideas are implemented there will continueto be waste fraud an abuse of the taxpayers dollars an the governor will be having to continue to go hat in hand begging for more federal dollars for this state. thank you