It's time to know when to say when

North Carolina is once again demonstrating the folly of holding primary elections in March. How long will it take to acknowledge that nobody wants to vote on March 3^rd?

In 2016, there was some genuine hope that our state might play a significant role in choosing presidential nominees if we moved our primary to March. It hasn’t happened. Neither are we giving voters much incentive to go to the polls.

In that 2016 primary, Trump’s first presidential campaign, 36 percent of all voters cast ballots. The 2018 primary, the “Blue Moon Election,” in which there were no statewide primary elections, turnout soared to 53 percent as Democrats voted to reduce Republican numbers in congress and the legislature. 2020 was the “Super Tuesday” primary, featuring Trump and Biden. Only 31 percent voted in that primary. In 2022, turnout dropped to 19.8 percent and only rose to 24 percent in 2024, again a presidential year.

Fewer than one-third of our voters select the candidates who run in the November general elections. We have a minority selecting a minority to serve us. We need to know when to say when to things that aren’t working. Let’s examine new approaches.

For starters, political parties are no longer influential in selecting and assisting candidates. They are basically money laundering machines. Let’s make primaries non-partisan. Anyone wishing to run for an office can do so. Yes, ballots might get longer, but it should attract more interest and larger turnouts. The top two (or maybe three) vote-getters would then square off in the general elections. We will have reduced costly runoff elections where few vote. The winner of the general election is the candidate who gets the most votes.

Additionally, seven months is far too long a period between the primary and general elections. Voters lose any interest they may have held. A more reasonable interval would be 90 to 120 days, at least reducing the time window when we must endure those horrid television ads.

We complain about partisan politics. This proposal will eliminate many of those complaints.

We should also establish term limits for elected officials. If it’s good enough for our governor and lieutenant governor it’s good enough for all elected officials, especially legislative leadership.

24 years ago, when Phil Berger first became a State Senator, he had a strong conviction to serve the people in his district. As Senate Minority Leader, he helped pass some good bi-partisan legislation. When he ascended into the role as President Pro Tem of the Senate, he played a major role in instituting more conservative financial management of state finances. Not only did our state balance budgets but it accumulated surpluses needed for rainy days. And Berger’s leadership in cutting personal and corporate taxes helped make our state more attractive for corporations and individuals to relocate here.

But power is a strong elixir, and those who have it usually want more. Former House Speaker Joe Mavretic said that in the first two years of a legislative leader’s tenure they work to serve the public. After that, they work to serve themselves and their friends. It is true. Phil Berger has led the Senate now for 15 years and is the most powerful politician in our state.

The reason why our state is the only one in the nation that doesn’t have an approved budget is because of Phil Berger. He has insisted on his own agenda and refused to compromise. Think about it, if the most powerful politician in our state wanted a budget passed it would have been finalized in June.

He has stayed too long, something initially whispered about but now being acknowledged out loud, even within his own party.

Berger is now embroiled in a hotly contested election. The sheriff of Rockingham (not Nottingham) is running a strong primary contest against Phil, an election that, at essence, is about Berger’s staying too long. Berger and his surrogates are beating the bushes to raise money to win the primary. But as head of the Senate, Berger could and should be using that money to help other Republicans win or retain their seats. Instead, those dollars are used in his fight against Page.

The sheriff has touted polls showing him ahead in the race, but regardless of the outcome Berger’s power and influence will be diminished.

There is a new wind blowing in state politics and House Speaker Destin Hall is at the forefront of it. Hall not only has the backing of his House Republican caucus but has courted and received some support from both legislative Democrats and the Democratic governor. Hopefully, this will be a new trend toward a more bipartisan legislature.

Phil Berger should have graciously left the stage with the praise and appreciation of the state. It would be embarrassing for his legacy to be tarnished by being defeated.

You need to know when to say when.

Tom Campbell is a Hall of Fame North Carolina broadcaster and columnist who has covered North Carolina public policy issues since 1965.  Contact him at tomcamp@ncspin.com