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.”
www.thecentersquare.com – By David Beasley | The Center Square contributor – (The Center Square – ) 2025-04-30 21:25:00
(The Center Square) – Authorization of sports agents to sign North Carolina’s collegiate athletes for “name, image, and likeness” contracts used in product endorsements is in legislation approved Wednesday by a committee of the state Senate.
Authorize NIL Agency Contracts, known also as Senate Bill 229, is headed to the Rules Committee after gaining favor in the Judiciary Committee. It would likely next get a full floor vote.
Last year the NCAA approved NIL contracts for players.
Sen. Amy S. Galey, R-Alamance
NCLeg.gov
“Athletes can benefit from NIL by endorsing products, signing sponsorship deals, engaging in commercial opportunities and monetizing their social media presence, among other avenues,” the NCAA says on its website. “The NCAA fully supports these opportunities for student-athletes across all three divisions.”
SB229 spells out the information that the agent’s contract with the athlete must include, and requires a warning to the athlete that they could lose their eligibility if they do not notify the school’s athletic director within 72 hours of signing the contract.
“Consult with your institution of higher education prior to entering into any NIL contract,” the says the warning that would be required by the legislation. “Entering into an NIL contract that conflicts with state law or your institution’s policies may have negative consequences such as loss of athletic eligibility. You may cancel this NIL agency contract with 14 days after signing it.”
The legislation also exempts the NIL contracts from being disclosed under the state’s Open Records Act when public universities review them. The state’s two ACC members from the UNC System, Carolina and N.C. State, requested the exemption.
“They are concerned about disclosure of the student-athlete contracts when private universities don’t have to disclose the student-athlete contracts,” Sen. Amy Galey, R-Alamance, told the committee. “I feel very strongly that a state university should not be put at a disadvantage at recruitment or in program management because they have disclosure requirements through state law.”
Duke and Wake Forest are the other ACC members, each a private institution.
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 primarily reports on the legislative development regarding NIL (name, image, and likeness) contracts for collegiate athletes in North Carolina. It presents facts about the bill, committee actions, and includes statements from a state senator without using loaded or emotionally charged language. The piece neutrally covers the issue by explaining both the bill’s purpose and the concerns it addresses, such as eligibility warnings and disclosure exemptions. Overall, the article maintains a factual and informative tone without advocating for or against the legislation, reflecting a centrist, unbiased approach.
SUMMARY: Donald van der Vaart, a former North Carolina environmental secretary and climate skeptic, has been appointed to the North Carolina Utilities Commission by Republican Treasurer Brad Briner. Van der Vaart, who previously supported offshore drilling and fracking, would oversee the state’s transition to renewable energy while regulating utility services. His appointment, which requires approval from the state House and Senate, has drawn opposition from environmental groups. Critics argue that his views contradict clean energy progress. The appointment follows a controversial bill passed by the legislature, granting the treasurer appointment power to the commission.
www.thecentersquare.com – By Alan Wooten | The Center Square – (The Center Square – ) 2025-04-30 14:47:00
(The Center Square) – Called “crypto-friendly legislation” by the leader of the chamber, a proposal on digital assets on Wednesday afternoon passed the North Carolina House of Representatives.
Passage was 71-44 mostly along party lines.
The NC Digital Assets Investments Act, known also as House Bill 92, has investment requirements, caps and management, and clear definitions and standards aimed at making sure only qualified digital assets are included. House Speaker Destin Hall, R-Caldwell, said the state would potentially join more than a dozen others with “crypto-friendly legislation.”
With him in sponsorship are Reps. Stephen Ross, R-Alamance, Mark Brody, R-Union, and Mike Schietzelt, R-Wake.
Nationally last year, the Financial Innovation and Technology for the 21st Century Act – known as FIT21 – passed through the U.S. House in May and in September was parked in the Senate’s Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs.
Dan Spuller, cochairman of the North Carolina Blockchain Initiative, said the state has proven a leader on digital asset policy. That includes the Money Transmitters Act of 2016, the North Carolina Regulatory Sandbox Act of 2021, and last year’s No Centrl Bank Digital Currency Pmts to State. The latter was strongly opposed by Gov. Roy Cooper, so much so that passage votes of 109-4 in the House and 39-5 in the Senate slipped back to override votes, respectively, of 73-41 and 27-17.
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 factual report on the passage of the NC Digital Assets Investments Act, highlighting the legislative process, party-line votes, and related legislative measures. It does not adopt a clear ideological stance or frame the legislation in a way that suggests bias. Instead, it provides neutral information on the bill, its sponsors, and relevant background on state legislative activity in digital asset policy. The tone and language remain objective, focusing on legislative facts rather than promoting a particular viewpoint.
