by Jane Winik Sartwell, Carolina Public Press March 31, 2025
Corn farmers on food stamps and taking second jobs. Equipment not being repaired. Debts going unpaid.
That’s the reality for many North Carolina corn growers this spring.
Last year was the worst season for the crop in state history, according to Ronnie Heiniger, a corn specialist at N.C. State. Drought wiped out acre after acre in eastern North Carolina last summer. Hurricane Helene devastated any crops left in the mountains.
Normally a $750 million dollar business, corn yielded only $250 million in 2024.
The economic cost to farmers — and their communities — couldn’t be more serious. And with a moderate drought stretching into the early days of this planting season, some are worried about more bad luck to come.
Corn is particularly sensitive to drought due to the crop’s very short window of pollination: This critical period of growth is just a few days long. In North Carolina, that vulnerable timeframe usually happens in June. If no rain falls during those days, corn will simply not continue to grow and yields will sharply decline.
“It was just about as bad as it could get (last season),” Heiniger recalled. “There’s no recovering from 60 days without rainfall. The mood among these farmers is very depressed. Some don’t know where to turn.”
But the N.C. House of Representatives is trying to help, hoping that the money allocated by the Corn Farmers Recovery Act, or HB 296, will be enough to keep the industry going.
The bill — which has yet to make it past the Appropriations Committee, the Rules Committee, the House and Senate — would transfer nearly $90 million from the State Emergency Response and Disaster Relief Fund to the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services. The money would go toward the creation of a 2024 Agricultural Disaster Corn Crop Loss Program, which corn farmers could apply to receive relief funds.
“To be honest, I don’t think most farmers thought the state was going to pay much attention to them,” Heiniger admitted. “This comes as a complete surprise.”
Corn farmers ‘at risk’
Corn is a summer staple on tables across North Carolina, but the crop also is necessary for feeding livestock and producing ethanol, which has a variety of uses. Sampson and Duplin counties, where pigs outnumber people 38 to 1, are home to the largest hog industries in the country. A shortage of feed could make that billion dollar business less profitable, too.
“I think a whole lot of farmers will be applying for this funding if it passes,” Zach Parker, an extension agent in Sampson County, told Carolina Public Press. “I don’t think devastation is understatement in the slightest. As for this summer, the only certainty is uncertainty. But I don’t think the corn industry is going anywhere. We have animals to feed.”
The bill would have the greatest economic impact in eastern North Carolina — the region with the largest, most valuable corn farms.
“In Wilson County, corn farmers have really been at risk,” said state Rep. Dante Pittman, a Democrat who serves Wilson and Nash counties and co-sponsored the Corn Farmers Recovery Act. “We saw an almost $4 million drop in income from corn in Wilson alone.
“The thing about this industry is that we don’t know what this year’s weather is going to bring. Anything we can do to prevent that loss from being devastating is necessary.”
Desperation down on the farm
With the cost of farming supplies high and crop commodity prices low, farmers are growing desperate.
“This bill will not only help farmers, but the farm communities that survive on selling fertilizer, chemicals, seeds, tractors and farm labor,” Heiniger explained. “It will help these rural communities where farmers are turning to food aid for their kids at school.”
The bill is geared toward those who grow corn, but since most farmers harvest a diverse set of crops, the money would in turn support production of soybeans, cotton, sweet potatoes and other North Carolina staples, according to Mike Yoder, an associate director of the College of Agriculture at N.C. State.
But some, like Rhonda Garrison, have concerns about the bill. Like, how will the relief funds be allocated? That’s something Garrison, director of the Corn Growers Association of North Carolina, wants to know.
“The bill is pretty ambiguous in terms of the formula for distributing the money,” Garrison contends. “I guess farmers will just have to apply for it and see what happens.”
But she doesn’t think the money will come too late to be useful.
“There were some farmers — overleveraged farmers who were already on the edge — that were done in completely by 2024,” Garrison said. “But not the majority. The potential money from this bill will likely go toward paying down debt.”
As planting season approaches, North Carolina corn farmers face difficult decisions about the future. There is a possibility the state will face some kind of natural disaster in 2025, whether it be hurricane, drought or continued fires.
“Us farmers rejoice in suffering because it produces character,” Heiniger said. “That’s what these farmers are trying to do: hold onto their character so they can get some hope and keep on going.”
SUMMARY: Jim Jenkins, a North Carolina baseball trailblazer and Negro Leagues player, exemplified resilience and excellence both on and off the field. His sons recall his superior skills—hitting, running, and catching—and how he faced challenges due to his skin color. Beyond baseball, Jenkins was a community father, teaching youths fundamentals and helping those in need. He shared a friendship with legend Hank Aaron, often attending Braves games with his family. His legacy endures through his children, who honor not just his athletic achievements but his kindness and humanity, inspiring future generations to carry on his impact.
James “Jim” Jenkins had a profound impact on the game of baseball as a trailblazer known in the Carolinas.
SUMMARY: A scientist reflecting on the politicization of science warns that ideological influence undermines objectivity, breeds mistrust, and hampers public understanding. The FY2026 budget proposal cut NIH funding by about 40%, saving taxpayers $18 billion, but only 1.5% of the total federal budget, while increasing defense spending by 13%. These cuts severely impact states like North Carolina, where science drives $2.4 billion in tax revenue and thousands of jobs. The cuts target indirect costs vital for research infrastructure and diversity efforts, mistakenly seen as ideological rather than essential scientific practices. The author calls for unity to prioritize facts over politics and protect scientific progress for societal and economic health.
www.thecentersquare.com – By Alan Wooten | The Center Square – (The Center Square – ) 2025-06-15 02:01:00
North Carolina’s U.S. House members voted along party lines on two Republican-backed bills: the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act” (H.R. 1), which cuts \$1.6 trillion in government spending, and the “Rescissions Act of 2025” (H.R. 4), which eliminates \$9.4 billion from entities like USAID and public broadcasting. Republicans called it a purge of waste, citing spending on drag shows and foreign projects. Democrats criticized the cuts as harmful and symbolic, calling the effort fiscally irresponsible. H.R. 1 passed 215-214; H.R. 4 passed 214-212. No Democrats supported either. A few Republicans broke ranks and voted against their party on each bill.
(The Center Square) – North Carolinians in the U.S. House of Representatives were unwavering of party preference for two bills now awaiting finalization in the Senate.
Republicans who favored them say the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, known also as House Resolution 1, slashed $1.6 trillion in waste, fraud and abuse of government systems. The Rescissions Act of 2025, known also as House Resolution 4, did away with $9.4 billion – less than six-tenths of 1% of the other legislation – in spending by the State Department, the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), the Corp. for Public Broadcasting (PBS, NPR), and other entities.
Democrats against them say the Department of Government Efficiency made “heartless budget cuts” and was an “attack on the resources that North Carolinians were promised and that Congress has already appropriated.”
Republicans from North Carolina in favor of both were Reps. Dr. Greg Murphy, Virginia Foxx, Addison McDowell, David Rouzer, Rev. Mark Harris, Richard Hudson, Pat Harrigan, Chuck Edwards, Brad Knott and Tim Moore.
Democrats against were Reps. Don Davis, Deborah Ross, Valerie Foushee and Alma Adams.
Foxx said the surface was barely skimmed with cuts of “$14 million in cash vouchers for migrants at our southern border; $24,000 for a national spelling bee in Bosnia; $1.5 million to mobilize elderly, lesbian, transgender, nonbinary and intersex people to be involved in the Costa Rica political process; $20,000 for a drag show in Ecuador; and $32,000 for an LGBTQ comic book in Peru.”
Adams said, “While Elon Musk claimed he would cut $1 trillion from the federal government, the recissions package amounts to less than 1% of that. Meanwhile, House Republicans voted just last month to balloon the national debt by $3 trillion in their One Big Ugly Bill. It’s fiscal malpractice, not fiscal responsibility.”
House Resolution 1 passed 215-214 and House Resolution 4 went forward 214-212. Republican Reps. Warren Davidson of Ohio and Thomas Massie of Kentucky were against the One Big Beautiful Bill and Republican Reps. Mark Amodei of Nevada, Brian Fitzpatrick of Pennsylvania, Nicole Malliotakis of New York and Michael Turner of Ohio were against the Rescissions Act.
Note: The following A.I. based commentary is not part of the original article, reproduced above, but is offered in the hopes that it will promote greater media literacy and critical thinking, by making any potential bias more visible to the reader –Staff Editor.
Political Bias Rating: Centrist
The article presents a straightforward report on the partisan positions and voting outcomes related to two specific bills, highlighting the contrasting views of Republicans and Democrats without using loaded or emotionally charged language. It neutrally conveys the Republicans’ framing of the bills as efforts to cut waste and reduce spending, alongside Democrats’ critique of those cuts as harmful and insufficient fiscal discipline. By providing direct quotes from representatives of both parties and clearly stating voting results, the content maintains factual reporting without promoting a particular ideological stance. The balanced presentation of arguments and absence of editorializing indicate a commitment to neutrality rather than an intentional partisan perspective.
